Access to architectural competitions functions a bit like the doors of the law in a Kafka tale, where entrance to the halls of justice is a virtual right of every citizen, that relentlessly runs aground before the reality of the diversionary mechanisms of bureaucracy.

The rules and regulations that govern access to competitions for certain building categories require aspiring participants to present a CV that gives details of completed works, or works under construction, in the categories afferent to the project.

In real terms, this means that if I want to take part in a competition for an airport, my CV has to have on it an infrastructural project of a similar category, the same thing goes for a school, or whatever.

So, in an attempt to safeguard skill via the filter of bureaucratic mechanisms, the establishment of a closed and redundant contest is accepted, a vicious circle that shortlists the usual names for the usual projects, offering few possible openings for new proposals or different experiences and approaches.

I am also ignorant as to the mystical acquisition of this initial design experience, of that biographical priming that is the only way to gain right of entry to the club of the accredited.

Finally

The brief considerations sketched out in these recent posts that have addressed the subject of competitions point the finger at a device for ensuring architectural quality that, at present, succeeds increasingly less in its task of rewarding good architecture and encouraging design experimentation.

For an unspecified number of factors, that affect the method and merit of the matter, the instrument of the public and private competition appears today - in an era in which despite economic conditions, architecture is much more visible - as something that slows down, standardises and demoralises architectural practice in Italy.

Is there still the space - and time - to entrust to competitions the growth of architectural awareness in the country? And if yes, how?