SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning / 2025 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 4

Analysis Of Sustainability Criteria in the Pritzker Architecture Prizes: A Qualitative Analysis (2019-2025)

Pritzker Mimarlık Ödüllerinde Sürdürülebilirlik Kriterlerinin Analizi: Bir Nitel Analiz Çalışması (2019-2025)

Zeynep Kamile Cenk(GAZI UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE)0000-0001-5148-2714
Pages
607–626
Publication Date
2025-12-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This situation results from the jury members being composed primarily of architects and critics.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Sustainability is a multifaceted concept that can be addressed with different evaluation criteria.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study's scope is 2019–2025, during which the jury members remained unchanged.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This situation results from the jury members being composed primarily of architects and critics.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2019–2025 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir mimari · Sürdürülebilirlik kriterleri · Sürdürülebilirliğin üç ayağı

Abstract

Sustainability is a multifaceted concept that can be addressed with different evaluation criteria. This study analyzes the sustainability discourses of architects awarded the Pritzker Architecture Prize, one of the world's most prestigious architecture awards, by examining the jury citations. The analysis was conducted using embedded theory, a qualitative research method, which involved converting codes extracted from the jury citations into concepts, which were then classified under social-cultural, environmental, and economic sustainability categories. The study's scope is 2019–2025, during which the jury members remained unchanged. The findings show that social-cultural sustainability (culture, quality of life, sense of place, community solidarity, social cohesion, etc.) was particularly prominent during the period in question, while environmental and economic dimensions were relatively less represented. This situation results from the jury members being composed primarily of architects and critics.

Özet

Sürdürülebilirlik, farklı değerlendirme kriterleri ile ele alınabilen çok yönlü bir kavramdır. Bu çalışmada, dünyanın en prestijli mimarlık ödüllerinden biri olan Pritzker Mimarlık Ödülü'nü kazanan mimarların sürdürülebilirlik söylemleri, jüri değerlendirmeleri incelenerek analiz edilmiştir. Analiz, jüri değerlendirmelerinden çıkarılan kodların konseptlere dönüştürülmesini içeren nitel bir araştırma yöntemi olan gömülü teori kullanılarak yürütülmüştür. Bu bağlamda, jüri üyelerinin değişmediği 2019-2025 dönemi ele alınmıştır. Bulgular, söz konusu dönemde sosyo-kültürel sürdürülebilirliğin (kültür, yaşam kalitesi, mekan duygusu, toplumsal dayanışma, sosyal uyum vb.) özellikle ön plana çıktığını, çevresel ve ekonomik boyutların ise görece daha az temsil edildiğini göstermektedir. Bu durum, jüri üyelerinin ağırlıklı olarak mimar ve eleştirmenlerden oluşmasından kaynaklanmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Cenk, Z. K. (2025). Analysis Of Sustainability Criteria in the Pritzker Architecture Prizes: A Qualitative Analysis (2019-2025). Gazi University Journal of Science Part B: Art Humanities Design and Planning, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 4, 607–626. https://ajindex.com/articles/1486766

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Khan, K., Henschel, T. “LCT-Based Framework for the Assessment of Sustainability: From the Perspective of Literature Review”, Social Indicators Research, 175, 1–20, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03333-8
  2. Kristoffersen, A. E., Schultz, C. P. L., Kamari, A. “A critical comparison of concepts and approaches to social sustainability in the construction industry”, Journal of Building Engineering, 91, 109530, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109530
  3. Barbier, E.B. “The concept of sustainable economic development”, Environmental Conservation, 14: 101, (1987). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900011449
  4. Wang, X., South, A., Farnsworth, C., Hashimoto, B. “From three-pillars to three-environments: Shifting the paradigm of sustainability in civil and construction engineering”, Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 20: 100748, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2024.100748
  5. Shahverdi, A. F., Mostafavi, F., Roodkoly, S. H., Zomorodian, Z. S., Homayouni, H. “Developing a Pedagogical Framework for an Integrated and BIM-Based High-Performance Design Studio: Experimental Case Study”, Journal of Architectural Engineering, 30(1), (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/jaeied.aeeng-1550
  6. Mair, S., Druckman, A. “Assessing the suitability of sustainability frameworks for embedding sustainability in higher education curricula: pragmatism versus transformation”, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 24(9): 318-334, (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-08-2020-0315
  7. Purvis, B., Mao, Y. Robinson, D. “Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins”, Sustainability Science, 14: 681–695, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5
  8. Wojtas-Harań, A. “Sustainable Architecture Principles in Sports Facilities: A Case Study in the Karkonosze Mountains,” Buildings, 15(6): 927, (2025). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15060927
  9. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. “Our Common Future” Official Records of the General Assembly, Annex No A/42/42, 24, (1987). Available online: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811?v=pdf
  10. Azapagic, A., Perdan, S. “Indicators of Sustainable Development for Industry”, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 78(4): 243–261, (2000). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1205/095758200530763 [11] Labuschagne, C., Brent, A. C. “Sustainable Project Life Cycle Management: the need to integrate life cycles in the manufacturing sector”, International Journal of Project Management, 23(2): 159–168, (2005). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.06.003
  11. Clune, W.H., Zehnder, A.J.B. “The evolution of sustainability models, from descriptive, to strategic, to the three pillars framework for applied solutions”, Sustainability Science, 15(3): 1001–1006, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00776-8
  12. Giddings, B., Hopwood, B., O’Brien, G. “Environment, economy and society: fitting them together into sustainable development”, Sustainable Development, 10(4): 187–196, (2002). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.199
  13. Klarin, T. “The Concept of Sustainable Development: From its Beginning to the Contemporary Issues”, Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 21(1): 67-94, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/zireb-2018-0005 [15] Kohler, N. “The relevance of Green Building Challenge: an observer's perspective”, Building Research & Information, 27(4-5): 309-320, (1999). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/096132199369426
  14. Cenk, Z. K., Mutlu Avinç, G., Arslan Selçuk, S. “Application of Biomimetic Strategies in Building Envelope Design for Water Harvesting,” Gazi University Journal of Science, 37(4): 1575-1594, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.1471707
  15. Öztürk, B., Mutlu-Avinç, G., Arslan-Selçuk, S. “Enhancing energy efficiency in glass facades through biomimetic design strategies,” Revista Hábitat Sustentable, 34–43, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.22320/07190700.2024.14.01.03
  16. Wieczorek, K., Bobak, Ł., Bukowski, P. “From Construction Industry Waste to High-Performance Insulation: Sustainable Rigid Polyurethane Foams with Recycled Polyol,” Materials, 18(17): 4179, (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18174179
  17. Almazam, K., Humaidan, O., Shannan, N. M., Bashir, F. M., Gammoudi, T., Dodo, Y. A. “Innovative Energy Efficiency in HVAC Systems with an Integrated Machine Learning and Model Predictive Control Technique: A Prospective Toward Sustainable Buildings,” Sustainability, 17(7): 2916, (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072916
  18. Lee, W. C., Kim, Y. I. “Sustainable Natural Ventilation Strategies for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality: An Experimental and Simulated Study in a Small Office During the Winter Season,” Sustainability, 17(11): 4961, (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17114961
  19. Uniyal, S., Lodhi, M. S., Pawar, Y., Thakral, S., Garg, P. K., Mukherjee, S., Nautiyal, S. “Passive solar heated buildings for enhancing sustainability in the Indian Himalayas. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,” 200: 114586, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2024.114586
  20. Umar, M. Z., Arsyad, M., Santi, S., Faslih, A. “Principles of Sustainable Architecture in the Production Of Bamboo Woven Wall Materials (Dendrocalamus Asper),” Sinergi, 24(1): 57, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.22441/sinergi.2020.1.008
  21. Bedoya-Montoya, C. M. “Construcción de vivienda sostenible con bloques de suelo cemento: del residuo al material,” Revista de Arquitectura, 20(1): 62–70, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.14718/revarq.2018.20.1.1193
  22. Volpe, S., Sangiorgio, V., Petrella, A., Notarnicola, M., Varum, H., Fiorito, F. “3D printed concrete blocks made with sustainable recycled material,” VITRUVIO - International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability, 8: 70–83, (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2023.18832
  23. Mukherjee, B., Boubekri, M. “Sustainable Architecture and Human Health: A Case for Effective Circadian Daylighting Metrics,” Buildings, 15(3): 315, (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15030315
  24. Firzandy, H., Sihombing, A., Fuad, A. H., Adam, M. “Co-housing as a Sustainable Architecture to Support the City’s Particular Community,” International Journal of Technology, 15(6): 1784, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v15i6.7336
  25. Taştan, H., Ciravoğlu, A. “The Effect of User Participation on Social Sustainability: A Comparison of Two Post-Earthquake Settlements in Turkey,” Open House International, 43(3): 94–101, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ohi-03-2018-b0011 [28] Moscoso, C., Morad, R., Oksvold, A., Dimmen, O., Skjermo, J., Tangrand, K. “Increasing citizen engagement in sustainable architecture using augmented reality: A pilot study,” Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 16: 100498, (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100498
  26. Cinquepalmi, F., Tiburcio, V. A. “Sustainable Restoration of Cultural Heritage in the digital era,” VITRUVIO - International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability, 8(2): 76–87, (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2023.20545
  27. Isais, G.F. Harjo, L.L. “Social equity and ethics in design of sustainable built environments,” in: The Routledge Companion for Architecture Design and Practice: Established and Emerging Trends, 203–210, (2016). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315775869
  28. Seyedrezaei, M., Becerik-Gerber, B., Awada, M., Contreras, S., Boeing, G. “Equity in the built environment: A systematic review,” Building and Environment, 245: 110827, (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110827
  29. Oh, O., Lim, J., Lim, C., Kim, S. A. “Health Performance and Cost Optimization Model for Sustainable Healthy Buildings,” Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 16(2): 303–309, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3130/jaabe.16.303
  30. Ahn, H., Son, S., Park, K., Kim, S. “Cost assessment model for sustainable health and safety management of high-rise residential buildings in Korea,” Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 21(3): 689–700, (2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2021.1902334
  31. Abusaada, H., Elshater, A. “Developing a guiding framework based on sustainable development to alleviate poverty, hunger and disease,” Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 18(2): 432–452, (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/arch-03-2023-0076
  32. Marino, F. P. R., Marrone, P. “From lifespan to useful life, towards a new paradigm of durability for sustainable construction,” TECHNE - Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, (20), 148–156, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.13128/techne-8259
  33. Martin, P.Y., Turner, B. A. “Grounded theory and organizational research”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(2): 141-157, (1986).
  34. Patton, M.Q. “Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri”, Ankara: Pegem Akademi, (2014).
  35. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. “Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory”, Third edition, Los Angeles, USA: Sage, (2008).
  36. https://www.pritzkerprize.com/laureates
  37. Sahely, H. R., Kennedy, C.A., Adams, B.J. “Developing sustainability criteria for urban infrastructure systems”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 32(1): 72-85, (2005).
  38. Rosen, M. A., & Kishawy, H. A. “Sustainable Manufacturing and Design: Concepts, Practices and Needs”, Sustainability, 4(2): 154-174, (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su4020154
  39. Akadiri, P. O., Chinyio, E. A., Olomolaiye, P. O. “Design of A Sustainable Building: A Conceptual Framework for Implementing Sustainability in the Building Sector”, Buildings, 2(2): 126–152, (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings2020126
  40. Abdul-Rahman, H., Wang, C., Wood, L. C., Ebrahimi, M. “Integrating and ranking sustainability criteria for housing”, Engineering Sustainability, 169(1): 3-30, (2016). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1680/ensu.15.00008
  41. Dalampira, E. and Nastis, S.A. “Back to the future: simplifying Sustainable Development Goals based on three pillars of sustainability”, International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Management and Informatics, 6(3): 226-240, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSAMI.2020.112089
  42. Wen, B., Musa, N., Onn, C. C., Ramesh, S., Liang, L., Wang, W. “Evolution of sustainability in global green building rating tools”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 259: 120912, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120912
  43. Lamdjad, I, Khalfallah, B. “The Inclusion of the Environmental Dimension of Sustainability in Studying Informal Settlements Using the INDI System”, Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 12(3): 8694-8700, (2022).
  44. Más-López, M. I., García-del-Toro, E. M., Alcala-Gonzalez, D., García-Salgado, S. “Sustainability Assessment in Infrastructure Projects”, Sustainability, 15(20): 14909. (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014909