Women in Architecture: Progress, Gaps, and the Work Still Ahead

At the scale of international exhibitions, Lina Ghotmeh was selected to design the Bahrain Pavilion for Expo 2025 Osaka. The project builds on her research into material culture and environmental responsibility, drawing inspiration from Bahrain’s maritime history and traditional shipbuilding techniques. Its timber structure references dhow construction while incorporating contemporary sustainable strategies, illustrating how national pavilions increasingly function not only as architectural statements but also as platforms for communicating cultural narratives and environmental priorities. Within major cultural institutions, Frida Escobedo has been commissioned to design the new wing for modern and contemporary art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. One of the most significant museum expansions undertaken in the city in recent decades, the project proposes terraced volumes clad in stone lattice, creating filtered light conditions while establishing visual connections with Central Park and the surrounding urban fabric. Similarly, the Ismaili Center Houston, designed by Farshid Moussavi, forms part of a global network of cultural and religious institutions developed by the Aga Khan Development Network.

The Internal Mechanics of Practice: A Reality Check

Despite these visible commissions, the internal structure of architectural practice often reveals a more complex reality. At the beginning of the 2000s, many globally influential architecture offices remained organized around highly centralized leadership models dominated by male founders. Many globally recognized architecture practices were closely identified with singular founding figures, reflecting a professional culture that long valorized the image of the individual “starchitect.” Women were present throughout design teams but rarely occupied visible leadership roles. A survey of the world’s hundred largest architecture firms conducted in the late 2010s found that only three were led by women, while sixteen had no women in senior leadership positions at all.

Over the past two decades, gradual changes have begun to reshape these hierarchies. Many firms have expanded partnership structures, introduced broader management models, and begun publishing diversity and pay-gap data. These measures have not eliminated disparities but have made them more measurable. In the United Kingdom, where firms with more than 250 employees must disclose gender pay statistics, the architecture sector reports a gender pay gap of roughly 16 percent, reflecting the continued concentration of higher-paid senior positions among men.

Individual practices illustrate both progress and continuing imbalance. At Foster + Partners, for instance, women hold a minority of senior roles; in one breakdown, only fourteen of the firm’s sixty-five senior partners were women. At Zaha Hadid Architects, one of the few globally recognized practices founded by a woman, women constitute a substantial portion of the design workforce but remain less represented in the most senior leadership positions, where long-serving figures continue to shape the firm’s management structure. At the same time, the practice reports that roughly 38-40 percent of its architects are women and that its staff represents dozens of nationalities, reflecting broader efforts toward workplace diversity.

These patterns are visible across the profession more broadly. While women now represent close to half of architecture students in many countries and approximately 46 percent of those beginning the licensure process in the United States, only about 27 percent of licensed architects and roughly 17 percent of firm principals or partners are women. The discrepancy between early-career representation and senior leadership illustrates what many researchers describe as the profession’s “mid-career attrition gap,” where demanding working hours, unequal promotion structures, and caregiving responsibilities disproportionately affect women’s career trajectories.

Despite these structural challenges, the leadership landscape of architecture has become more diverse than it was two decades ago. Firms increasingly operate through collaborative partnership structures rather than singular authorship. The presence of female founders and partners, whether in globally recognized practices or emerging studios, has also contributed to expanding the range of leadership models visible within the discipline.

Recognition and Legacy: The Architecture of Awards

Another lens through which representation can be examined is the system of professional awards that shapes architecture’s global recognition. Major distinctions, from lifetime achievement medals to project-based prizes, play a significant role in constructing architectural narratives and determining which architects become part of the profession’s collective memory. While the visibility of women architects has increased in recent years, the historical distribution of these recognitions reveals a more uneven trajectory.

Among the most prominent distinctions, the Pritzker Architecture Prize remains one of the most closely followed indicators of international recognition in architecture. Since its establishment in 1979, the prize has recognized more than fifty laureates. Within this group, six women have received the award. Zaha Hadid became the first woman to receive the prize in 2004 and remains the only woman to have been awarded it individually. Subsequent recognitions involved partnerships or collaborative practices, including Kazuyo Sejima in 2010 alongside Ryue Nishizawa, Carme Pigem in 2017 with RCR Arquitectes, Yvonne Farrell and Shelley McNamara in 2020, and Anne Lacaton in 2021 with Jean‑Philippe Vassal. Over time, the composition of the prize’s jury has also evolved. Earlier juries were largely male-dominated, while more recent panels have included women architects, scholars, and cultural figures.

A similar pattern appears in the history of the RIBA Royal Gold Medal, awarded since 1848. For more than a century, the medal was granted almost exclusively to male architects. Zaha Hadid became the first woman to receive it in 2016, more than 160 years after its establishment. More recent recipients include Yasmeen Lari in 2023, whose work focuses on humanitarian architecture and climate-resilient construction in Pakistan. As with other awards, the composition of the selection committees and advisory groups associated with the medal has gradually diversified in recent years. In the United States, the AIA Gold Medal shows a comparable trajectory. Since the award was first granted in 1907, only a small number of women have received the honor. Julia Morgan became the first woman to receive the medal in 2014, awarded posthumously nearly six decades after her death, and more recently, Denise Scott Brown and Venturi received the medal jointly in 2016.

Project-based distinctions often reveal a somewhat broader distribution of recognition. Awards such as the Aga Khan Award for Architecture and the EU Mies van der Rohe Award typically recognize built projects and multidisciplinary teams rather than individual authors. Because contemporary architecture is frequently produced through collaboration, these awards tend to include a wider range of contributors, including architects, engineers, and designers, than traditional lifetime achievement prizes. The composition of award juries also reveals an evolving landscape. In earlier decades, juries for major international awards were frequently composed almost entirely of male architects and critics. Over the past fifteen years, many institutions have introduced more balanced juries that include architects, curators, scholars, and practitioners from a wider range of geographic and professional backgrounds. Recent editions of the EU Mies van der Rohe Award and the Aga Khan Award for Architecture, for instance, have featured juries approaching gender parity.

Beyond Representation: The Work Still Ahead

While gender representation remains central to this discussion, many contemporary debates increasingly move beyond gender alone. Questions of equity are closely tied to broader issues of race, geography, class, and access to resources. Architecture operates within global networks of education, capital, and cultural institutions that shape whose voices become visible within the discipline. As a result, conversations about women in architecture increasingly intersect with wider efforts to address systemic barriers faced by practitioners from underrepresented regions, minority communities, and non-traditional professional backgrounds.

In recent years, curatorial platforms, research initiatives, and emerging practices have increasingly foregrounded these overlapping perspectives. Exhibitions, publications, and major built projects have increasingly highlighted architects working across the Global South, indigenous designers, and practitioners whose work engages local knowledge systems, social infrastructures, and climate resilience. Rather than framing diversity solely as a matter of demographic representation, these approaches emphasize how expanding the range of voices within architecture can also broaden the questions the discipline asks, about materials, construction practices, land use, community participation, and environmental responsibility.

Within this context, the growing presence of women architects across exhibitions, institutions, and major commissions reflects a broader transformation in how architectural culture is produced and understood. The increasing recognition of collaborative authorship, interdisciplinary research, and community-based practice signals a gradual shift away from the singular authorship models that long dominated professional narratives. Yet persistent gaps in leadership, recognition, and institutional power suggest that these changes remain uneven and ongoing. In this light, International Women’s Day functions less as a singular moment of celebration than as a reminder of the broader structural conversations shaping the profession. Examining the trajectories of women in architecture across practice, academia, exhibitions, and awards reveals both meaningful progress and the institutional limitations that continue to shape the field. Expanding opportunities for women and other historically underrepresented groups, therefore, is not only a matter of representation but also a step toward a more diverse and responsive architectural culture that better reflects the complexity of the societies and environments it seeks to serve.