In a recent article titled \u201cTo Make is to Think\u201d<\/a>, we discussed how architects can take advantage of the process of making not only to create buildings but to produce knowledge as well. Currently, architectural research is conducted primarily within universities, think tanks or non-profit organizations; a rather internal process that appears mostly in biennales, academic journals and speculative architectural competitions. But are there any places within the industry where such methods can also exist?<\/p>\n When we look at contemporary practice, large architecture firms such as Morphosis and MVRDV have established dedicated research studios within their firm \u2013 The Now Institute<\/a> and The Why Factory<\/a>, respectively. They tackle speculative projects without necessarily producing conventional architectural \u201cproducts\u201d in the end. What happens, however, with smaller firms? The ones who don\u2019t have the resources to sustain a parallel research arm alongside their core practice. For these studios, research cannot exist as an internal luxury; it must operate as a practice in its own right.<\/p>\n Eil\u00eds Finnegan<\/a> | Editor’s Choice Winner,\u00a0 Architectural Visionary of the Year, 2025 Vision Awards<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Traditional architecture practices are still evaluated through a single outcome, the design and construction of a building. \u201cSuccess\u201d is measured against cost, timelines and ease of construction, without necessarily addressing more urgent issues that impact the wider site or city. Frankly, today\u2019s pressing spatial questions do not need a singular architectural solution as an answer.<\/p>\n This leaves a gap in the industry that can be filled by research studios that operate in-between academia and practice, without the obligation to build. Perhaps they could adopt the role of a strategic consultant for cities or NGOs. They could also participate in cultural production works such as exhibitions or publications, and even take on commissions for studying specific urban scenarios. Rather than asking \u201cwhat can we build?\u201d these research studios could pose questions like \u201cwhat spatial knowledge is missing?\u201d or \u201cwhat futures need to be tested?\u201d Grants, fellowships and institutional partnerships could be the way to fund this work, suggesting a parallel economic and business model for architecture that adds value through research and speculation rather than square footage.<\/p>\n Growing Rowhouses by Ho-gyeum Kim<\/a> | Jury Winner, Vision for House, 2025 Vision Awards\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n From Coal to Core by Wei Feng<\/a> | Editor’s Choice Winner, Vision for Renewal, 2025 Vision Awards\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Admittedly, the construction process is quite slow. It takes years to go from design to implementation, especially for large-scale projects that hold the most impact in relation to their context. For that reason, traditional architectural practice almost always fails to keep up with contemporary urgencies (climate change, urban inequality, etc.). Research studios, on the other hand, could function as foresight engines, developing strategies that can predict future needs and buy some time for conventional practice to respond.<\/p>\n Some key research ideas could be long-term climate scenarios, migration-driven urbanism, post-extractive landscapes, as well as infrastructural afterlives. By working with these topics, research studios essentially map potential futures and create responses that allow architecture to act rather than react. They take the form of visionary architecture that, instead of projecting distant, fictional worlds, engages with near futures based on grounded data and sociopolitical realities.<\/p>\n Exoskeleton by Cheng Wei Lee<\/a> | Editor’s Choice Winner, Vision for Nature, 2025 Vision Awards<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Yet, the most important shift that has to happen within the market is treating (and paying) a speculative deliverable as an equal to an architectural output. These deliverables might take the form of atlases, catalogues, drawings, narrative diagrams, model prototypes, fictional briefs and even laws that shape the built environment.<\/p>\n Unlike traditional deliverables, these \u201cartefacts\u201d are used to open up frames of inquiry, reframe conversations and expand the boundaries of what architecture can do, without having to be blueprints for construction. While architecture struggles to justify its usefulness and relevance in the contemporary world, such outputs could perhaps help the discipline to operate upstream, creating questions before solutions are even requested.<\/p>\n Currently, the common perspective is that research studios are \u201cnice to have\u201d but not essential \u2013 viewed as an afterthought and as a practice that operates in the periphery. But this framing misses the point. The ability to research and speculate is architecture\u2019s most valuable skill, since it is a discipline that touches various fields and actors that shape our world. Consequently, instead of treating architectural research as a luxury or a prelude to \u201creal work\u201d, the profession needs to acknowledge it as a legitimate and critical practice that moves architectural thought forward. If to make is to think, then research studios are where architecture learns how to think in advance.<\/p>\n \n Architects: Want to have your project featured? Showcase your work by uploading projects to Architizer<\/a>\u00a0and sign up for our\u00a0inspirational newsletters<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n Featured Image: Flatiron & NoMad Streetscape Plan<\/a> by OSD (Office of Strategy + Design) | Jury Winner, Vision for Cities, 2025 Vision Awards\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n The post Why Architecture Needs More Research Studios<\/a> appeared first on Journal<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Because not every architectural idea should wait for a client, a permit, or a construction budget.
\n1. The \u201cResearch Studio\u201d as a Missing Business Model<\/h3>\n
![\"Eil\u00eds](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Eilis-Finnegan.png.avif\")
<\/p>\n
\n2. Research Studios as Foresight Engines<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/1-361.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/222-3.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n3. The Rise of the \u201cSpeculative Deliverable\u201d<\/h4>\n
![\"Exoskeleton-architizeer\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Exoskeleton.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n
\nThe post Why Architecture Needs More Research Studios appeared first on Journal.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2000","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-inspiration"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2000","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2000"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2000\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2000"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2000"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/brandxdomains.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2000"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}