Stirling Prize 2024: a welcome turn towards reuse and retrofit but too safe to represent the UK’s ‘best’ architecture

The Stirling Prize is awarded every year by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) for the UK’s best new architecture. This year’s six project shortlist includes only one new building. The rest is made up of a masterplan document outlining the intended placement of buildings and streets around Kings Cross, London Underground’s Elizabeth Line and three other projects that work extensively with existing structures.

Since its inception in 1996, we have seen success move from high profile civic buildings, museums, galleries and libraries to works that move towards a wider definition of architectural quality, which includes residential development and community spaces.

In the last ten years, winners have included a social housing project (2019), a community-owned pier (2017) and a school (2015), as well as the more usual mix of cultural and university buildings. This reflects the renewed ethical consciousness of the profession, struggling to assert itself in the context of a climate emergency, the tragic Grenfell tower fire and marginalisation in the construction process as the traditional role of the architect is replaced by developers, builders or new technologies.

To win the Stirling Prize you have to choose your building type carefully. An education or civic building will stand a good chance. Build it in the south of the UK, preferably London. Employ a well-established, reputable winner. Between them, Foster+Partners, WilkinsonEyre and Zaha Hadid Architects have won over a quarter of the awards. Finally, have deep pockets. Well-funded universities or world-famous cultural institutions have a strong track record. It also helps to avoid anything too radical, critical or unconventional.

This year’s shortlist backs this up with only one project in the north of England (Park Hill, Sheffield) while four are in London.

In 2023, the most northerly project was in Coventry while in the last ten years, of the 54 shortlisted projects, 45 were in the south or east of the UK – of which 27 were in London. Remarkably there have been no nominations from Wales or Northern Ireland in the last decade. This contrasts with the first ten years of the prize in which only 50% of winners were in southern Britain.

The 2024 shortlist includes the redevelopment of two listed buildings, the National Portrait Gallery in London and phase two regeneration of Park Hill, Sheffield. Another nominee, Wraxall Yard is a restored and repurposed dairy farm in Dorset, South West England, for inclusive accommodation and education.

The masterplan of Kings Cross as well as the Elizabeth Line both include a complex mix of new architecture and refurbishment. Only Chowdhury Walk housing for Hackney Council (London) could be reasonably termed a “new building”. This interest in creative reuse and retrofit is in stark contrast with previous shortlists. Excluding 2024, in the last decade only 20% of shortlisted projects involved extensive work with existing buildings.

This focus on reuse is a welcome one. The construction industry is responsible for around half of the UK’s carbon emissions. Retrofit and reuse have the potential to both improve the energy performance of buildings, as well as reducing the need for carbon intensive new building. This is a first step to realising the regenerative potential of the built environment, utilising the carbon already invested in the built environment as part of larger circular construction practices.

In what appears to be a conscious effort to recognise more diverse forms of “architecture”, we might hope future awards continue this trend and embrace innovative and non-traditional forms of practice. This might include, for example, innovative self-build, community-led design and temporary installation, perhaps without the involvement of architects.

Novel forms of disruptive practice are stretching the possibilities of the discipline. Some examples may include Forensic Architecture’s use of architectural design tools to examine human rights abuses. Or Dark Matter Labs who are designing a community led “civic economy” to facilitate new ways of creating and adapting our cities and environments. There’s also Assemble’s innovative participatory practice working with marginalised communities and grassroots organisations to transform places.

However, while the new focus this year on reuse and retrofit is a refreshing move forward, the prize remains staid in many ways.

As ever, this year nominees must be RIBA Chartered Architects or International Fellows. Inevitably there is a desire from the RIBA to showcase the profession however, this rule suggests an implicit belief that only architects can make architecture, positioning the profession as their own arbitrators of quality. This does not effectively acknowledge the collaborative efforts of building, but perhaps more worryingly it reinforces narratives of exclusivity, individualism and elitism.

Based on what we know wins, the Elizabeth Line (Grimshaw, Maynard, Equation and Atkins) or Kings Cross (Allies and Morrison and Porphyrios Associates) are strong contenders. Both are in London, represent a suitably different but “safe” architecture and were exceptionally expensive. Grimshaw and Allies and Morrison are high profile practices, neither of which have won the award. However, while the RIBA continue to limit entrants to its own members, and juries remain mainly composed of previous winners, esteemed architects and corporate sponsors, the competition is unlikely to be a true reflection of the “best” architecture in the UK.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

Robert Grover is working with Mikhail Riches on the AHRC Funded Transforming Homes research project.