Are the culture wars distracting us from architecture’s real challenges?

The culture wars seem to be everywhere. And now it seems architecture has found itself caught in the crossfire. From Donald Trump’s push for neoclassical buildings to Patrik Schumacher’s claim that a “woke takeover” is killing design, the debate has become ideological. The media may have jumped on the term “woke,” but take a step back, and in some respects, Patrik has valid points to make. There is widespread frustration with the state of the profession, but our understanding of the causes of that lack of innovation may be different. I would argue ‘wokeism’ has nothing to do with it.

In my recent conversation with engineer Steve Webb, he noted that “architecture is at a low ebb”, a sentiment echoed by Thomas Heatherwick in his recent Humanise campaign. Many architects share the frustration that design decisions are too often dictated by cost-cutting, with every element needing justification to survive value engineering. What is clear is that too much of our built environment is uninspired, unambitious, and shaped by short-term financial pressures rather than long-term vision.

The market is stifling innovation

For decades, the free market has been treated as the answer to all problems. But in architecture, has the opposite been true? Too many buildings today are the result of financial engineering rather than creative vision. Developers cut costs, planning systems reward the safe and familiar, and architects are often sidelined altogether. Heatherwick himself put it best: why does everything look like profit?

If we want more innovation, we need to change the conditions in which architecture is created. That means valuing good design, investing in new materials, and encouraging risk-taking in sustainable construction. The market needs to shift to valuing the right things: creativity, sustainability, and the health and well-being of end users.

The cities and towns we create today will shape the way people live for generations. Let’s make sure they are places worth living in

Some argue that deregulation and a more free-market approach would unlock greater architectural creativity. Are Praxis and Prospera really the answer? Is NEOM the answer? As Steve points out in our conversation, the supposedly futuristic NEOM is still steel and concrete – not much innovation here. Such ‘innovative’ developments seem destined to become enclaves purely for tech entrepreneurs and crypto investors – exclusive ghettos rather than widely beneficial urbanism. The question is not just how to foster innovation, but how to ensure that innovation serves everyone, rather than a privileged few.

Architecture is political

Architecture has always been political. Every decision about what gets built, where, and for whom is shaped by politics – whether it’s housing policy, planning reform, or the economic forces that dictate what developers prioritise. The built environment reflects the values of those in power, from the utopian visions of post-war social housing to the market-driven glass towers of today. If we want to create better places, we need to acknowledge that architecture doesn’t exist in a vacuum – it is shaped by policy, economics, and ideology.

Breaking the cycle of risk aversion

The real enemy of innovation isn’t ideology – it’s fear. As Steve points out, architecture has lost its way because of a deep-rooted fear of risk. Slashed fees mean less time for thinking, pushing architects and engineers to stick to what’s been done before. The result? A cycle of repetition that rewards mediocrity and punishes boldness.

But there is hope. Sustainability and the urgent need to cut embodied carbon offer a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink architecture from the ground up. We have the tools, the technology, and the expertise to create beautiful, sustainable buildings that truly serve communities. What we need now is the collective will to demand better.

Time to take action

The future of our built environment is too important to be reduced to ideological soundbites. Instead of fighting culture wars, we should be campaigning for cities that inspire, housing that is both aspirational and affordable, and a construction industry that values innovation over short-term profit.

Architects, planners, engineers, governments and communities must come together to push for better design, smarter policies, and a built environment that reflects the way we want to live – not just what is cheapest to build. We need governments to invest in the future, clients to recognise the value of great architecture, and the industry to stop settling for less.

It’s time to expect more. To demand more. The cities and towns we create today will shape the way people live for generations. Let’s make sure they are places worth living in.

>> Also read: ‘It’s the end of architecture’ – Patrik Schumacher declares war on woke culture

>> Also read: Housing needs architects – and it’s time to make the case