Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Ardeth
A magazine on the power of the project
10-11 | 2022
Competency
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
Professionalization and its Impact on the Diversity of Competencies
Jen Lam and Sammie Ng
Electronic version
URL: https://journals.openedition.org/ardeth/3116
ISSN: 2611-934X
Publisher
Rosenberg & Sellier
Printed version
Date of publication: December 1, 2022
Number of pages: 207-229
ISSN: 2532-6457
Electronic reference
Jen Lam and Sammie Ng, “History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects”, Ardeth [Online], 10-11|
2022, Online since 01 November 2023, connection on 05 December 2023. URL: http://
journals.openedition.org/ardeth/3116
The text only may be used under licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. All other elements (illustrations, imported
les) are “All rights reserved”, unless otherwise stated.
207
Abstract
Despite having a key impact on professionalization
and design, the role of the professional institute is
often taken for granted in the architectural field. This
piece centers on the overlooked history of the Hong
Kong Institute of Architects (HKIA) to unravel the
complex processes of professionalization in a specific
spatio-temporal context – Hong Kong. Compared to
other countries, the making of architecture in Hong
Kong could be vastly different, where theoretic dis-
courses and nationalistic ambitions have been less
influential. As the representative, examination, and
accreditation body of Hong Kong architects, HKIA
would be a pivotal stakeholder in shaping the archi-
tectural practice. The institute’s struggle for proper
recognition of architects over the years through
professionalization would be marked by different
and evolving strategies, both inward and outward. It
is also emblematic of the struggle between different
competencies which makes it challenging to define
the role of the architect and consequential when it
comes to the profession’s agency in shaping the built
environment more broadly.
History of the Hong Kong
Institute of Architects.
Professionalization and its
Impact on the Diversity of
Competencies
Aliation:
(1) (2) Independent
scholar
Contacts:
(1) jennifercwlam [at]
gmail [dot] com
(2) sammiengyanping
[at] gmail [dot] com
Received:
06 November 2021
Accepted:
20 October 2022
DOI:
10.17454/ARDETH10-11.12
ARDETH #10 #11
Jen Lam (1), Sammie Ng (2)
208
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
Competency in its simplest definition in relation to
professional employment is what makes someone
ready for a particular role and perform required tasks
(Austin, 2019). In architecture, the spotlight often
goes to the “starchitect” or the “master” of landmark
buildings, famed for their individual genius. What is
often overlooked but increasingly looked at in such a
discursive manner is the extent to which professional-
ization (an arguably collective endeavor) has shaped
the ideas surrounding architectural competency and
influenced the built environment more broadly.
Professionalization is defined as a process whereby
participation in the profession is increasingly limited
through various strategies, often spearheaded by a
professional institute (Wilensky, 1964). In Hong Kong,
that would be the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
(HKIA), which was founded in 1956, and originally
named the Hong Kong Society of Architects (HKSA).
To understand how architectural competency is
constructed and contested by different stakeholders
in the specific spatial and temporal context of Hong
Kong, we analyze the history of HKIA through the
processes of professionalization and discuss its impli-
cations within the architecture field.
The critical examination of professional institutions’
history is also often not in the mainstream architec-
tural discourse given how they are often taken for
granted as regulatory bodies to be adhered to rath-
er than understood. Nonetheless, comprehensive
critical histories of the architect profession in west-
ern contexts have been written (Kostof, 1986; Duffy,
Hutton, 1998), while there is also increasing interest
in critically constructing these histories in non-West-
ern contexts (Kvan, Liu, Jia, 2008; Shadar, Orr, Maizel,
2011; İmamoğlu, 2018). It is worth noting that even
HKIA themselves have just a 120-word description of
their 65 years of history on their website, and do not
keep a complete archive of their own.
By referring to its annual reports and publications up
till 2000, newspaper articles and other relevant mate-
rials, we uncover and critically discuss HKIA’s evolv-
ing role in facilitating the professionalization of the
architecture profession in Hong Kong, similar to what
Orr (2015) did for the Architects Accreditation Council
of Australia (AACA). In the first part of this article, we
cover the various and extensive strategies adopted
Professionalization
is defined as a
process whereby
participation in
the profession
is increasingly
limited through
various strategies,
often spearheaded
by a professional
institute.
209
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
by HKIA both within and without the profession over
the years. We then move on to bring competency into
our analysis, by discussing how different architectural
competencies have been contested during this compli-
cated process, opening up questions when considering
the field’s future.
Multiple Processes of Professionalization by HKIA
At the beginning of the 20th century, only the colonial
government had the power to appoint architects. The
Public Health and Building Ordinance 1903 intro-
duced the list of authorized architects (AA) system,
whereby the Governor would announce in the Gazette
architects, engineers and surveyors, who are “deemed
qualified” to submit building plans for the Public
Works Department’s approval. 53 years later, the
setting up of HKSA marked the beginning of a local
group of architects increasingly having a say in de-
fining their profession both within and without. They
sought to establish and enforce standards within the
profession, distinguish themselves from other profes-
sions and gain public and legal recognition.
Professionalization within the systems of HKIA
A key aspect of professionalization involves in-
creasingly limiting and defining participation in the
profession (Wilensky, 1964), and this is achieved by
HKIA through its examination system. The then-HKSA
would take over from the Royal Institute of British
Architects (RIBA) starting from 1970, when RIBA ap-
proved HKSA to hold their version of Examination in
Professional Practice and Practical Experience as RIBA
Part 3 after five years of preparation. The examina-
tion tested Hong Kong’s Building Ordinance Cap. 123,
Town Planning Ordinance Cap. 131, and Landlord and
Tenant Ordinance Cap. 255 along with HKSA’s Codes
of Professional Conducts and Scales of Charges which
restricts architects’ unprofessional behavior (HKSA,
1971). Although RIBA’s versions were referenced,
they were attuned to local conditions. The Scale of
Charges covered common Hong Kong multi-story,
low-cost housing typologies (HKSA, 1961). In 1972,
the new exam arrangement in the 15th Anniversary
of the Society marked the transfer of the power from
RIBA to HKSA as the importance of local context was
stressed in the colonial qualification system. It was in
A key aspect of
professionalization
involves
increasingly
limiting and
defining
participation in the
profession.
210
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
the same year that HKSA was renamed the Hong Kong
Institute of Architects (HKIA) in 1972. This was not
only a symbolic move, a “recognition of the increased
responsibility of the work of the architect” (HKIA,
1973: 7), but perhaps also an assertion of legitimacy of
a professional institution. The affix of “H.K.I.A.” was
simultaneously introduced for members to profes-
sionally represent themselves, with the hope that
members will not need to “look overseas for mem-
bership but put faith, support and resources in HKIA”
(HKIA, 1972: 7).
The aim of professionalization is not only to ensure
architects’ ability in creating safe buildings, but also to
maintain their competitiveness in international stan-
dards. The logbook assessment format was refined in
1977 to emphasize proper practical experiences, while
the case study, which is to ensure sufficient under-
standing of the processes of a project, was introduced
in 1982 (HKIA, 1977; 1982); both assessment criteria
were once found in the RIBA system (RIBA, n.d.).
Over the years, the HKIA professional assessment
has evolved from 2 papers (1971) to 4 papers (1982)
to 9 papers (1996). This examination structure can
be compared to China’s, where NBAA’s 9-paper exam
was developed simultaneously from 1992 to 1995.
Number of Papers Passing Rates (Year)
HKIA 9 59.93 % (2020) (average of 8
written papers)
National Board of Architectural
Accreditation (NBAA) (China)
6 (Originally 9 before 2022) NA
Architect Registration Examination
(ARE) (U.S.)
6 45%-66% (2020)
Professional Practice Examinations
(Singapore)
2 NA
Royal Institute of British Architects
(RIBA)
4 87% (2018/2019)
Architects Accreditation Council of
Australia (AACA)
3 85% (2019)
Source: HKIA, NBAA, NCARB, BOA, RIBA, AACA
Table 1: Comparison of professional assessments of architects across various countries
211
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
(The National Architects Association of R.O.C., 2011).
Notably, the expanded sections (Paper 3-7) in 1996
mostly pertain to the technical aspects of building and
construction under “Architectural Design Applica-
tion” (fig. 1), which echo Paper 3,4,5,7 and 9 of China’s
NBAA’s Grade 1 registered architect assessment (The
National Architects Association of R.O.C., 2011). Com-
pared to exams in other countries such as Australia
(Table 1), HKIA’s assessment also includes engineering
and planning topics on top of legal and architectural
knowledge. The average passing rate of each HKIA
exam paper remained below 60% in 2020 (HKIA,
2020), which may be considered sufficient evidence
of its difficulty. It rigorously tests the competence of
Hong Kong architects to handle the dense and hilly
environment with comprehensive technical and legal
knowledge, which perhaps affords them the capa-
bility to lead other building consultants, including
engineers and surveyors who were once referred to
as “architects” in the AA system under British colonial
rule. If limiting the training and access to become an
architect is a key aspect of professionalization (Freid-
son, 1973), developing such a rigorous assessment sys-
tem is a clear example of how HKIA professionalized
the occupation in the territory to maintain architects’
competitiveness in relation to other building profes-
sions as well as in international standards.
Facing outward: HKIA’s discursive strategies to build
external recognition
Professionalization also relies on recognition by other
stakeholders in society outside the profession. Over
time, the organization expanded its impact strategi-
cally by interweaving networking, publicity, and most
importantly, legislation, in addition to their internal
qualification process to promote the exclusivity of
architects. Together, these discursive strategies center
HKIA as the main architectural organization to inter-
act with the state, other building professions, inter-
national organizations as well as frame the public
understanding of architects and architecture (Cohen,
Arnold, Wilkinson, Finn, 2005; Mieg, Oevermann,
2021).
Firstly, the long battle for architects’ legal status
could be traced back to the 1960s, when HKSA loose-
ly included members from Members of the Institute
The average
passing rate of each
HKIA exam paper
remained below
60% in 2020.
212
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
213
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
214
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
of Civil Engineers (MICE) and Fellow of the Royal
Institute of Chartered Surveyors (FRICS) (HKSA, 1961).
Nowadays, the registration of architects is protected
by the Architects Registration Board (ARB) under the
Architects Registration Ordinance (ARO) (Cap 408,
1990), ensuring that only HKIA members could be
qualified as architects in Hong Kong. HKIA persisted
in the ARO as they believed that the legislature was
compulsory for the profession to gain “leadership in
all matters related to the built and planned environ-
ment”, and most importantly, to “command the re-
spect of the Government, commerce, industry and the
general public” (HKIA, 1972: 10). It is eminent that the
architects, who are led by HKIA, strive to protect their
rights as designers and dominate the industry. When
the ARO was passed in 1990, the Hong Kong Institute
of Architects Incorporation Ordinance (Cap. 1147) was
also incorporated. By setting up a Registration Board,
HKIA handles issues of disciplinary proceedings and
the statutory use of the title “architect”. It also took
over partial duties and power of the Building Authori-
ty (Haffner, 1989).
As early as 1962, the need for an Architects’ Ordi-
nance was raised by the HKSA council to protect the
title of “architect” and “architecture” (HKSA, 1963).
However, contrary to the rapid development of the
professional exam system, its progress was partic-
ularly slow because both architecturally trained
and non-architecturally persons could be named as
AAs. Hence, engineers and surveyors were irritat-
ed as they believed that their rights as AA may be
forfeited, thus losing the job opportunities originally
afforded to them (HKSA, 1968). In this light, HKSA
had to step back to pacify them by denying that the
architects’ registration creates a monopoly. Instead,
HKSA framed the effort as putting “in order” the three
houses of architects, engineers and surveyors through
a joint ordinance and collaborative registration board
(HKSA, 1968). Yet, due to the complexities of the con-
flicting interests, the negotiation on the Bill remained
stagnant and the joint board was never established.
HKIA also capitalized on specific events in their
advocacy for the government’s recognition, fitting
Wilkensen’s (1964) observations that legal protection
of the profession is often prompted by safety con-
cerns. They did so by utilizing the newspaper editorial
Fig. 1 - Pathway to
become an Architect
in Hong Kong. This
diagram indicates
the path to become
an architect in Hong
Kong, which include
a bachelor’s degree,
a master’s degree, a
minimum-24-month
working experien-
ce and a 9-paper
Professional Asses-
sment. Also, note the
relationship between
Authorized Person
and Registered
Architect. A further
exam is needed to be
taken for one to sign
o building drawings
submitted to Buildin-
gs Department.
HKSA framed the
effort as putting
“in order” the
three houses
of architects,
engineers and
surveyors through
a joint ordinance
and collaborative
registration board.
215
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
as a platform for its messages since the 70s (Fig. 2). In
1972, a major landslide in the Mid-Levels led to the
collapse of buildings and the loss of 67 lives, alarming
the whole city when it came to the safety of architec-
ture in hilly areas. A famous civil engineering-trained
“authorized architect” faced 7 summonses in 1973
for failing to comply with the building ordinance
in his company’s rebuilding work of the hilly sites.
In the end, he was merely fined HKD$1,000 (South
China Morning Post, 1974), triggering a huge wave of
public opinions. HKIA immediately issued a statement
through the press to clarify that he was never its
member, thus not an “architect” (Kung Sheung Daily
News, 1974). In the same year, the Building (Amend-
ment) Ordinance in 1974 led to the modification of the
definition of “authorized architect (AA)” to “autho-
rized person (AP)” (Building Ordinance (Amend-
ments), Cap. 123, 1974). Insignificant as it may sound
Fig. 2 - Collage of
HKIA editorials
(SCMP, 1974; 1975;
1982; 1991; Wah Kiu
Yat Po, 1974; 1979;
1981).
216
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
to the general public, the amendment was crucial in
defining the term “architect” and paved the way for
the ARO in 1990. This shows how publicity was also a
tool to garner public support for legal reform.
HKIA argued in various newspaper articles about the
necessity of the ordinance by comparing themselves
to other professions such as lawyers and doctors who
have statutory protection, as well as the existence of an
Architects Registration Act in the United Kingdom since
1931. They also complained about how the term “ar-
chitect” was abused by other consultants who did not
have to go through years of training and exams. Over
the years, more than 20 HKIA editorials were published
to instill a proper understanding of an “architect” in
the public realm. As they mentioned in their yearbook
when the Architects Registration Bill was gazetted,
“the main point [they] are asking for is the protection
of the title ‘Architect’ ” (HKIA, 1989: 7). Above all other
concerns, HKIA was particular about the limitation
of the use of “architect” to ensure the members of the
profession are properly acknowledged and respected
as the leader of the building team (Haffner, 1989).
In parallel, HKIA has been getting international rec-
ognition to foster reciprocal acknowledgment of its
professional license. This is particular for Hong Kong’s
situation as a colonized city with a marginalized
position in nation-based international architectural
organizations. Since its formation, HKIA has actively
been involved in various regional and international
architectural organizations, such as the East Asia Re-
gional Organization, the Commonwealth Association
of Architects (CAA) and the International Union of Ar-
chitects (UIA), rising to worldwide recognition in the
70s. In 1971, HKIA became one of the founding mem-
bers of the Architects Regional Council Asia (ARCASIA)
along with India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Malaysia, and
Singapore (ARCASIA, 2010), where the reciprocity of
registration of overseas professional qualifications
was a major item in its conferences (HKIA, 1973). In
1978, HKIA’s multiple attempts to apply as candida-
ture resulted in it attaining full membership of UIA
from an associate membership despite Hong Kong
not being a country and its affiliation to RIBA (HKIA,
1978). In the 90s, HKIA was among UIA’s discussions
of freeing up services across national boundaries
(HKIA, 1995). Ten years after the passing of ARO,
HKIA has reached a mutual recognition agreement of
HKIA has actively
been involved in
various regional
and international
architectural
organizations,
rising to worldwide
recognition in the
70s.
217
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
qualification with The National Administration Board
of Architect Registration (NABAR) of China since 2000,
CAA since 2001, The Architects Accreditation Council
of Australia (AACA) since 2010, The New Zealand Reg-
istered Architects Board (NZRAB) since 2012 (Canber-
ra Accord on Architectural Education, 2017).
There is also a reinforcing aspect between legal status
within the city and international recognition. Specifi-
cally, proper statutory status is a criterion when mutu-
al accreditation for architectural education between
Hong Kong and other countries (Canberra Accord on
Architectural Education, 2017). This suggests that legal
status within the city was also relevant for greater
international recognition, such that its qualification
could also be recognized outside of the city, making its
pursuit more important.
In 1970, the HKIA report wrote: “The buildup of sound
relationships with the regional and worldwide parent
body must be one of our constant future aims, second
only to the development of a stronger Hong Kong
Society,” (HKSA, 1971, p.3). This quote suggests that
the society’s discursive strategies, despite directed to
different stakeholders, are interwoven and interde-
pendent. All its effort in publicity, networking and
legislation helped HKIA in building up Hong Kong
architects’ authority and legitimacy.
Yet, it must be noted that even after the ARO was en-
acted in 1990, HKIA members were still not recognized
as the sole building designer. In fact, HKIA approached
the government several times for the possibility of
self-licensing of AP but received “considerable resis-
tance from the government” in 1993 (HKIA, 1993: 5).
Under the current government-controlled system, en-
gineers and surveyors are still allowed to submit plans
after passing a further interview to be authorized as AP.
Contested Competencies in the Process of Professionali-
zation and their implications
Having outlined key strategies and processes in the
professionalization of the architecture profession fa-
cilitated by HKIA, we move on to discuss how various
competencies, including the cultural, creative and
critical, have been contested. We observe that HKIA’s
role in promoting certain competencies over others is
not static, and can be understood in the context of the
changing socio-political conditions of Hong Kong.
HKIA’s role in
promoting certain
competencies
over others is not
static, and can
be understood in
the context of the
changing socio-
political conditions
of Hong Kong.
218
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
Cultural Competency - Localization
Our understanding of HKIA’s origins must be rooted
in the context of Hong Kong being a British colony
with its unique context and environment compared to
the UK. We argue that HKIA’s origins were an example
of cultural competency, whereby local architects saw
the importance of understanding local contexts for
overall society and fought for their rights to take up
more space within the field of architecture.
As explained earlier, prior to HKSA and the ARO, the
colonial government mandated who could practice as
an architect using the AA List, most on the list were
engineers, especially in the post-war period. The
heightened need for housing meant that the concern
was safety and quantity rather than design. Mean-
while, British architects were appointed to design
iconic governmental buildings such as the Supreme
Court (1912) and the Central Police Station (1919). The
colonial government’s undermining of local architec-
tural talents and thus the neglect of design for the ma-
jority was what prompted HKIA to work on improving
professional standards and promoting recognition of
Hong Kong architects.
Six years after the Architecture Faculty at the Uni-
versity of Hong Kong was set up by Gordon Brown
from Britain and after multiple failed attempts in the
40s, HKSA was established in 1956 with a prominent
Chinese architect Gin-Djih Su as the first president
(Hong Kong and Far East Builder, 1956). This is more
than a century after the British took over Hong Kong
Island, and is an important milestone in developing
a group of local professional architects. Moreover,
the establishment of HKSA membership allowed for
multiple ways to be recognized as an architect other
than the appointment by the colonial government (al-
though it did not equate to authorization for signing
off architectural drawings like an AA), as those who
had apprenticed under an architect for more than 8
years could also join. Such resistance to colonial pow-
er in the architectural realm was proven successful.
In 1969, HKIA’s former Vice-President would rebuke
Mr. Daniel Jones, a then-visiting MP from the UK, who
had suggested importing a British planner to plan the
city in a letter to the press. The Hong Kong architect
declared that “I believe the architects here are just
as competent if not more so than our colleagues in
Prior to HKSA
and the ARO,
the colonial
government
mandated who
could practice as an
architect using the
AA List, most on the
list were engineers.
219
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
Britain,” and also questioned their competency: “In
Britain, I do not think any architect has ever had the
experience of planning to a density of two thousand
persons per acre,” (Ouyang, 1969, p. 11). Such a posi-
tion shows HKSA’s advocacy for local architects who
have a better understanding of the built environment
and socio-cultural context.
Design Competency – Creativity, Project Management
or Building Codes?
If cultural competency is what differentiates a Hong
Kong architect from a British one, design competen-
cy is perhaps what differentiates him or her from
surveyors or engineers, who we have established as
competing with architects for the exclusive right to
sign off on architecture projects since British’s AA sys-
tem and now under the HKSAR’s AP system. However,
while creativity would be a competency stressed by
HKIA in their earlier discourse and activities, we infer
that it is increasingly marginalized at the individual
architect level as architects’ role is increasingly man-
agerial within projects. However, as a professional as-
sociation, HKIA would indirectly influence the design
of buildings through building codes.
In 1991, the then-President wrote in an op-ed follow-
ing the passing of the ARO that there is an increased
role for architects in Hong Kong which is differentiat-
ed from others in the building industry such as engi-
neers and surveyors, as they are also concerned with
“the ways of life, tradition and culture in a broader
sense” (Chung, 1991: 20). He also argued that the
architecture profession must differentiate itself from
other professions like engineers by showing the public
“what [they] can do apart from designing buildings”,
which he specifies as having a social mission and con-
science (Chung, 1991: 20). There were some attempts
in the earlier part of HKIA’s history to play a greater
role in influencing the built environment in more
visible and creative ways. For example, HKIA submit-
ted comprehensive design plans to the government
to redevelop the entire Central district, and promoted
them in the press (Ta Kung Po, 1960) (Fig. 3). Though
these plans were partly adopted, the association
would stop spending similar energy on later planning
ideas. Even though a Metroplan Workshop on West
Kowloon design was held in 1989, it remained an
As a professional
association, HKIA
would indirectly
influence the
design of buildings
through building
codes.
220
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
artistic expression rather than a practical plan.
Instead, the present-day examination system empha-
sizes extensive technical knowledge about regulations
and project management. Architects in Hong Kong may
indeed have gained “leadership in all matters related to
the built and planned environment” (HKIA, 1972, p.10),
but perhaps by converging the profession towards
what engineers and surveyors can do, while neglecting
the development of the design and social conscious-
ness more unique to the role of the architect. While
more and more small-/ mid-scale offices with licensed
architects are progressively participating in design dis-
courses of the city nowadays, such as One Bite Studio
which focuses on placemaking, as well as LAAB that
emphasizes fabrication (One Bite Studio, n.d., LAAB,
2022), most architects still take up administrative roles
in ‘running projects’ rather than design (Fig. 4). On
one hand, this culture results in the marginalization of
idealistic design proposals, which are deemed unreal-
istic. On the other hand, in a city heavily influenced by
building codes and developers’ demands, an adminis-
Fig. 3 - Central
District development
planning by HKIA that
balanced walkability
and vehicular access
(Tai Kung Po, 1960:1).
221
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
trative architect’s leading role in liaison and managing
procedures become crucial to balance the economy,
safety and function of a building.
If HKIA did not promote an architectural profession
that emphasized design, it still had an extensive influ-
ence on Hong Kong’s built environment through its
engagement in related legislation. They started trying
to influence legislation by setting up committees to
draft professional reports in response to various bills.
A liaison group between the Public Works Department
(PWD) and Authorised Architects (AA) was set up in
1959, marking the first of many such bilateral liaison
groups which effectively place HKSA and later HKIA
firmly in the inner circle of policymaking. By 1971, ef-
forts to engage PWD would be under the Association’s
Board of Architecture Practice and it was mentioned
in their annual report that the liaison group was an
“invaluable link with Government” (HKIA, 1972: .9).
In 1991, HKIA had members on 7 governmental com-
mittees/ sub-committees, and 12 government-HKIA
liaison groups were set up to let HKIA members have
Fig. 4 - Conventio-
nal organization of
the Building Team.
Redrawn from
Christopher Haner’s
(HKIA’s former presi-
dent) speech in 1989
(Haner, 1989).
HKIA still had an
extensive influence
on Hong Kong’s
built environment
through its
engagement in
related legislation.
222
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
their say on matters like codes. They would end up
influencing multiple codes related to means of escape,
fire safety, thermal transfer, etc. that shaped and
restricted architectures in Hong Kong. Therefore,
instead of engaging in design discourses and stylistic
concerns, the competency to design in this city is in-
herently shaped by professionalization through codes
and procedures, with a more subtle but no less impact
on Hong Kong’s built environment.
Marginalized Competency of Criticality
To maintain the coherency of professionalism,
cultures of open and critical debates are often mar-
ginalized. A case in point would be the controversy
which was caused by then-President Tao Ho’s public
comments about the design of the Central Library in
1997. His comments had been perceived as jumping
out of line and a breach of the HKIA professional code
of conduct, whereby members should not criticize
the works of other members in public (Hon, 1997). He
emphasized in his defense that the intention of his
comments was not to criticize the design abilities of
the architects in question, but to question the system,
which perhaps explains why it was heavily criticized.
He also encouraged fellow HKIA members: “Members
of our Institute must seize this golden opportunity of
the handover to stand up courageously and to chal-
lenge the passive mentality of always saying “Yes, sir!”
to asking ‘Why not?’ ” (HKIA, 1997:4). Unfortunately,
but unsurprisingly, he would be one of the few Presi-
dents to ever encourage such an open culture of being
critical in the long line of HKIA’s history.
The issue of whether the competency of criticality
is considered relevant for the architectural profes-
sion can also be seen in the gap between the 9-paper
ordinance-based assessment and the 6-year education
offered in universities in Hong Kong. While univer-
sity curriculums encourage critical inquiry, the HKIA
examination is more about mastery of the existing
guidelines. The incongruence between education and
practice can also be seen in how there is a reverse
correlation between the percentage of HKIA-licensed
architects in a school versus its ranking. The ratio of
HKIA members (full & associate) to non-HKIA teachers
at the top two accredited architecture schools (The
University of Hong Kong and The Chinese Univer-
While university
curriculums
encourage critical
inquiry, the HKIA
examination
is more about
mastery of the
existing guidelines.
223
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
sity of Hong Kong) is only 1:6 while that in Chu Hai
College of Higher Education, the lowest-ranked school
among the three, is as high as 1:1 (Chu Hai College
Department of Architecture, 2018; CUHK School of
Architecture, 2019; HKU Faculty of Architecture,
2021). The ratio above indicates that fewer scholars
in higher-ranked universities opt for HKIA licenses.
Despite having stronger backgrounds and internation-
al acclamation, academics engaged in critical research
may not find the contrasting focus of the 9-paper
professional assessment (which emphasizes technical
knowledge) worth undertaking. This is a huge differ-
ence from earlier relationships between HKIA and
HKU, with scholars highly involved in HKIA’s policies
till the 1980s. With this increasing schism between
studio course design and real practice, whereby de-
signs based on idealism and critical thinking are being
encouraged at school, students who learn architecture
are either designing without consideration of context
during their studio, or merely rule-following when
they get into practice.
Implications of certain competencies being prioritized
over others: Homogeneity and Commodification
Overall, the professionalization process by HKIA can
be said to have reduced the diversity of competen-
cies that are deemed relevant to being an architect
in Hong Kong. This seems to go against their position
when they were first set up. In the earlier days of
HKSA, they allowed architects to have diverse design
trainings to be recognized as architects. Other than
Fig. 5 - Glassdoor
review by an Archi-
tectural Intern in a
local rm (Note: AA:
Architectural Assistant
(a graduate who has
not gotten a license),
A: Architect (a HKIA-li-
censed architect)
(Glassdoor, 2020).
The
professionalization
process by HKIA
have reduced
the diversity of
competencies that
are deemed relevant
to being an architect
in Hong Kong.
224
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
being registered as AA in Hong Kong or the UK, people
who apprenticed for 8+ years under an architect were
as well eligible as members (HKSA, 1959). For exam-
ple, member no. 86 Lee Yin Chuen had no profession-
al membership or qualification but was promoted to
a full member presumably due to his accumulation of
working experience (HKSA, 1959). This condition to
membership was removed in 1972, when the society
rebranded as a professional institute (HKIA, 1973).
Meanwhile, RIBA is planning to abandon its existing
Parts 1 to 3 assessments and switch to a more flexible
system for wider pools of talent (Waite, 2022). We re-
call a quote from HKSA’s Yearbook in 1962: “[...] when
the authorities have full confidence in the integrity of
all practising architecture in the Colony that there will
be room for a relaxation of the rules” (HKSA, 1963:
4). This quote may have been forgotten in the dust of
the Institute’s history, given its current prominence in
rule setting and enforcing.
The other issue is the commodification of architect’s
qualification, some of which HKIA itself participates
in. On top of paid lectures by HKIA, PassHKIA is a
private tutorial website set up by several persons who
claimed to have passed the professional assessment
of the institute. It provides charged services, which
include quizzes on Paper 1-6 to “save time and money
for another exam” (PassHKIA, n.d.). The emergence
of such a service is an example of how the difficulty
of such a critical exam has led to the creation of a
market, and those with more financial resources can
purchase educational advantages which are then
translated to qualifications for greater earning power.
Another example in which the qualification process
becomes subject to the market and therefore suscepti-
ble to exploitation is the encouraged year-out practical
experience. The year-out experience, equivalent to
Stage 1 practical experience under the RIBA system,
must be 5-12 months and requires the signature of a
registered architect in HKIA’s Logbook (HKIA, 2020).
In some offices, the ratio between year-outs and
seniors could be as high as 1:2. In smaller offices,
year-outs are often asked to handle the job duties
of an architectural assistant while receiving 60% of
their salary and with deplorable working conditions
(Fig. 5). The issue of “cheap labour” is generally
unquestioned by the industry under the notion of
The issue of “cheap
labour” is generally
unquestioned
by the industry
under the notion of
educating year-outs
for the professional
exam.
225
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
educating year-outs for the professional exam. In fact,
the year-out experience is not compulsory for profes-
sional assessment, yet most students automatically
take it as a prerequisite (Refer to Fig. 1). The non-ex-
istent requirement also reflects professionalism has
dominated the discourses of architectural practice, as
unstipulated procedures are construed as unspoken
but “necessary” and accepted without question.
Conclusion
For more than half a century, Hong Kong architects
have constantly been establishing its identity and
power in relation to other stakeholders, including
the state (first the colonial and later the SAR govern-
ment) and other professional institutes whether in
competition or cooperation. By tracing the history of
the architecture profession in Hong Kong through the
history of the professional institute, we show ongoing
tensions between various architectural competencies
in defining the readiness to be an architect, and invite
those part of the institute and field to consider wheth-
er change, in the form of more diversity, is necessary.
After all, the history of HKIA precisely shows the kind
of agency architects have amidst the kind of structure
and context they have had to operate within.
Not only has the architect profession been shaped by
architects themselves through the architectural asso-
ciation, but their endeavor can also be grounded in
the historical and unique context of Hong Kong. Just
as the article was also initially an attempt to decenter
the grand monographs of starchitects within architec-
tural discourse through exploring professionalization
as a collective effort, there is also a need for more
studies into trends in architectural history on topics
such as professionalization in places not in the West,
each with their contingencies. The kind of profession-
alism championed by HKIA, while hegemonic, is nei-
ther colonial nor nationalistic, and has influenced this
city’s built environment and anchored its identity in
the form of legislation and standards. Spanning across
the colonial era and the handover to China, the efforts
and outcomes accompanying professionalization are
counter to the pigeonholed characterization of Hong
Kong as a “borrowed time, borrowed place,” where
ephemeral is the constant.
Not only has the
architect profession
been shaped
by architects
themselves through
the architectural
association, but
their endeavor can
also be grounded in
the historical and
unique context of
Hong Kong.
226
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
Ultimately, there is a need to critically comprehend
and unpack the professionalization system i.e. un-
derstand how it came to be besides noting its current
hegemony. It is only when professionalization is prop-
erly discussed and critiqued can the issues of margin-
alization of other competencies and schisms between
studio and reality be resolved and reconciled. Embed-
ded in the complex structure and evolution of pro-
fessionalization, it is time for us to look beyond solid
built forms to understand and define architectural
competency in Hong Kong to move forward.
References
AACA. Rep (2019), National Examination Paper, AACA Report
to Boards. AACA, August 2019 [Online]. Available at: https://
www.aaca.org.au/wp-content/uploads/August-2019-NEP-Sum-
mary-Report-.pdf [Accessed: 5 November 2021]
ARCASIA (2010), Brief history [Online]. Available at: http://
www.arcasia.org/about-us/brief-history.html [Accessed: 1
November 2021].
NCARB (2021), Are 5.0 pass rates [Online]. Available at:
https://www.ncarb.org/pass-the-are/pass-rates [Accessed: 5
November 2021].
Architects Registration Ordinance (1990), Cap. 408.
Austin, Z. (2019), Competency and its many Meanings, “Phar-
macy”, vol. 37, n. 7, pp. 1-6.
Board of Architects Singapore, (2022), General Requirements
and Information for PPE Candidates [Online]. Available at:
https://www.boa.gov.sg/files/General_Info_for_PPE_candi-
dates_Updated_2022.pdf [Accessed: 5 November 2021].
Buildings Ordinance (Amendment) (1974), cap. 123.
Canberra Accord on Architectural Education (2017), (rep.)
Canberra Accord on Architectural Education Provisional
Review-The Hong Kong Institute of Architects (HKIA)/Archi-
tects Registration Board HKSAR (ARB) [Online]. Available
at: http://canberraaccord.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/
HKIA-2017-Report-for-Signatory-Status_complete.pdf [Ac-
cessed: 6 October 2022]
Chung, W.-N. (1991), Architects Must Put Professional House
in Order, “South China Morning Post”, pp. 20.
Chu Hai College Department of Architecture (2018), Faculty
[Online]. Available at: https://arch.chuhai.edu.hk/homepage/
faculty/ [Accessed: 5 November 2021].
Cohen, L., Wilkinson, A., Arnold, J., Finn, R. (2005), Remem-
ber I’m the Bloody Architect!, “Architects, organizations and
discourses of profession. Work, Employment and Society”,
vol. 4, n. 19, pp. 775-796.
CUHK School of Architecture (2019, August 1), Faculty. School
of Architecture, CUHK [Online]. Available at: http://www.
227
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
arch.cuhk.edu.hk/faculty-staff/faculty/ [Accessed: 5 Novem-
ber 2021].
Culture - LAAB architects · artists · designers · makers: Hong
Kong (2022) [Online]. Available at: https://www.laab.pro/en/
team/culture/ [Accessed: 5 October 2022].
Duffy, F., Hutton, L. (1998), Architectural Knowledge: The Idea
of a Profession, London - New York, E & FN Spon.
Hong Kong and Far East Builder (1956), Proposed Hong Kong
Society of Architects – Meeting of Architects at the American
Club, “Hong Kong and Far East Builder”, vol. 1, n. 12, p. 23.
Freidson, E. (1973), Professions and the Occupational Prin-
ciple, in E. Freidson, The Professions and their Prospects,
Beverly Hills, Sage, pp. 19-38.
General info for PPE CANDIDATES UPDATED 2019 - Boa. (n.d.)
[Online]. Available at:https://www.boa.gov.sg/files/Gener-
al_Info_for_PPE_candidates_Updated_201 9.pdf [Accessed: 5
November 2021].
Haffner, C. (1989), Ordinances for Architects, “The HKIA
Newsletter, September 1989”, HKIA, pp. 10-14.
Haffner, C. (1989), The Architects – Innovative Management of
the Managers, “The HKIA Newsletter, October 1989”, HKIA,
pp. 12-25.
HKU Faculty of Architecture, (2021), People [Online]. Avail-
able at: https://www.arch.hku.hk/people/arch_staff/ [Ac-
cessed: 5 November 2021].
Hon, M. (1997, August 13), Architects to Launch Inquiry into
President, “South China Morning Post”, p. 6.
Hong Kong Institute of Architects (1972), Yearbook.
Hong Kong Institute of Architects (1973-2000), Annual Report.
Hong Kong Institute of Architects (1974, April 1), Jianzhushi
xuehui laixian 建築師學會來 函, “Kung Sheung Daily News 工
商日報”.
Hong Kong Institute of Architects / Architects Registration
Board (2020), Professional Assessment Handbook.
Hong Kong Society of Architects (1959-1971), Yearbook.
İmamoğlu, B. (2018), Architectural Professionalization in Tur-
key, Professionalism and Its Posts, in H. Sadri (ed.), Neo-lib-
eralism and the Architecture of the Post Professional Era,
Springer, pp. 31-47.
Kostof, S. (1986), The Architect: Chapters in the History of the
Profession, New York, Oxford University Press.
Kvan, T., Liu, B., Jia, Y. (2008), The Emergence of a Profession:
Development of the Profession of Architecture in China, “Jour-
nal of Architectural and Planning Research”, vol. 3, n. 25,
pp. 203-220.
Mieg, H.A., Oevermann, H. (2021), Architects in Europe: Mod-
els of Professionalisation and Potential Implications for the
Planning Profession, disP-The Planning Review, vol. 1, n. 57,
pp. 6-17.
228
History of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects
Mirza & Nacey Research (2020), RIBA Education Statistics
[Online]. Available at: https://www.architecture.com/-/media/
DE213D6DC130456CA4643B01890A8D73.pdf?la=en [Ac-
cessed: 5 November 2021].
Orr, K. (2015), Institutionalising national standards: a history
of the incorporation of the Architects Accreditation Council
of Australia (AACA) and the National Competency Standards
in Architecture (NCSA) [Online]. Available at: https://www.
architecture.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Institutionalis-
ing-National-Standards_Kirsten-Orr_2015.pdf [Accessed: 5
November 2021].
Ouyang, L. (1969), Architects Reply to MP, “South China
Morning Post”, p. 11.
RIBA (n.d.), Pathways to Qualify as an Architect [On-
line]. Available at: https://www.architecture.com/educa-
tion-cpd-and-careers/how-to-become-an-architect [Accessed:
7 October 2022].
PassHKIA (n.d.), FREQUENTLY ASKED [Online]. Available
at: https://passhkia.com/hkia-exam-study-materials-past-pa-
per-mc-questions-premium-access/#faq [Accessed: 5 Novem-
ber 2021].
One Bite Design Studio (n.d.), Placemaking [Online]. Avail-
able at: https://www.onebitedesign.com/placemaking [Ac-
cessed: 7 October 2022].
Public Health and Buildings Ordinance, 1903, Hong Kong.
Saw, S.-H., Kin, C. W. (1975), Population Growth and Redistri-
bution in Hong Kong, 1841-1975, “Southeast Asian Journal of
Social Science”, vol. 1, n. 4, pp. 123-131.
Schmitt, R. C. (1963), Implications of Density in Hong Kong,
“Journal of the American Institute of Planners”, vol. 3, n. 29,
pp. 210-217.
Shadar, H., Orr, Z., Maizel, Y. (2011), Contested Homes: Pro-
fessionalism, Hegemony, and Architecture in Times of Change,
“Space and Culture”, vol. 3, n. 14, pp. 269-290.
South China Morning Post (1966), Architect Calls for Master
Plan, “South China Morning Post”, p. 1.
South China Morning Post (1974), Prominent Architect Fined
$1,000, “South China Morning Post”, p. 5.
South China Morning Post (1982), Call for Stricter Architect
Checks, “South China Morning Post”, p. 8.
Ta Kung Po 大公報 (1960), “You jianzhushi xuehui sheji
zhongqu haiwufazhanjihuanijiukuozuo shangyezhongxin
tongshi gaishanjiaotong 由建築 師學會設計中區海塢發展計劃擬
就闢作商業中心同時改善交通, “Ta Kung Po 大 公報”, p. 4.
The National Architects Association of R.O.C. 中華民國全國建
築師公會 (2011), (rep.) Canjia haixialiangan youguan jian-
zhushi kaoshi yu zhiyezhidu jiaoliuhuodong 參加「海峽兩岸有
關建築師考試與執業制度交流活動」出國報告, pp. 1-31.
Waite, R. (2022, 7 June), Ditching Parts 1, 2 and 3 has ‘over-
whelming support’ says ARB, “Architects’ Journal” [Online].
229
Jen Lam, Sammie Ng
Available at: https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/
arb-claims-overwhelming-support-for-plans-to-revolution-
ise-architects-education [Accessed: 7 October 2022].
Wilensky, H. L. (1964), The Professionalization of Everyone?,
“American Journal of Sociology”, vol. 2, n. 70, pp. 137-158
[Online]. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2775206
[Accessed: 5 November 2021].
