Eyes on the Prize: Filipino Architects Share 2025 Pritzker Bets

The time has come for another Pritzker Prize laureate. Recent selections and criteria changes have showcased the award’s growth in terms of defining achievements and representation, stirring left and right conversations within the industry. Last year, Japanese architect Riken Yamamoto brought the award back to Asia and Japan following Arata Isozaki’s win in 2019, while in 2022, contemporary architect and afro-futurist Diébédo Francis Kéré made history as the first African architect to receive the prize.

In anticipation of the 2025 Pritzker Prize Winner announcement, Kanto asked Filipino architects to share their bets for this year’s awards, their thoughts on the prize’s selection thus far, and Filipino architects they deem deserving of architecture’s Nobel.

Welcome to Kanto’s Pritzker Prize Special! To start with, who do you think should win the Pritzker Prize for 2025, and why?

Eldry Infante, founder of MEDE Studio: Hi, Kanto! Grateful to be part of this special! With much respect and admiration, I think Isandra Matin Ahmad deserves to win the Pritzker Prize. I was taken aback when I saw his studio’s work for the Banyuwangi Airport in Indonesia. Designed with nods to the local culture, he opened the terminal spaces to the rural environment. The design’s simple gestures, informed by its locality, felt revolutionary and unexpected, urging you to reflect on why such work hasn’t been done earlier.

The jury that gave the airport the Aga Khan Award in 2022 described it as “modern and efficient in all aspects, but at home in its place”—which I believe is also a fitting description for Matin’s practice. It operates in a contemporary world but never forgets where it is and where it came from. It deeply respects Indonesian vernacular architecture’s values and lessons, which has an evident effect on their building’s relationship to climate, program, and material. Most of the time, you can’t imagine their work being built elsewhere, given its robust relationship with its context. Studio andramatin’s work is also social, experimental, dynamic, unexpected, modern, beautiful, inspired, and inspiring. It’s many things at once, a result of mastery, focus, and commitment to the craft.

Besides all that, I think it’s also time to champion an architect from South East Asia!

Keshia Lim, founder of San Studio: Hello, Kanto! I hope it’s okay to answer this from a personal perspective. I learned that it’s only in recent years that the criteria for the Pritzker Prize have included social and environmental responsibility, whereas when the prize first began, it focused primarily on artistic excellence.

Perhaps, instead of awarding one architect who excels across all criteria, it might be worth considering recognizing exceptional achievements in a particular aspect or even awards per criteria. As architects, we understand that it’s not always possible to excel in all aspects of architecture at once.

For instance, I think of Junya Ishigami’s work, which is deeply inspiring. His ability to ignite wonder and change the way people perceive and experience architecture—creating new ways to imagine what architecture can be—sets him apart. The emotional and poetic impact of his work is certainly worth celebrating, even if his focus isn’t socially or environmentally driven.

Then there’s Vo Trong Nghia, who has made significant contributions by using local materials, particularly bamboo, and blending them with modern contexts. He shows how vernacular architecture can coexist with the modern setting while respecting the environment, offering low-cost solutions with low environmental impact that are artistically and aesthetically compelling.

I also think of Alastair Parvin, who isn’t working in architecture in the traditional sense but has revolutionized the idea of democratizing housing globally through WikiHouse, “a modular system for creating beautiful, high-performance zero-carbon buildings.” Using modern open-source technology, his research and initiatives have empowered many and inspired a shift towards bottom-up housing strategies, making housing more accessible to all. I learned from my Master’s Degree in Bartlett that perhaps the architect of the future will evolve from being a designer of physical objects to a designer of systems.

Joevic Mondejar, founder of Mondae Studio: Thank you for inviting me to be a part of this! Answering your questions allowed me to reflect on how the Pritzker Prize could hold deeper significance for the architectural world and the communities it serves.

I believe Marina Tabassum Architects (MTA) is worthy of a Pritzker! I first came across the studio during random online research for bamboo. Their projects resonated with me, proving that architecture does not need to be excessive to be powerful. MTA champions low-tech, high-impact solutions, crafting humble yet profound spaces that embrace light, air, and materiality, creating architecture that uplifts communities and respects nature.

Edwin Uy, founder of Edwin Uy Design Office (EUDO): Thank you for having me, Kanto! I’d like to answer this question based on my recent experiences with architectural spaces and personal affection due to similar philosophies in design. I was in Lisbon two months ago, and I have finally encountered Kengo Kuma’s intervention in the Calouste Gulbenkian’s grounds for his foundation and museum. I have always respected his attention to detail and his ability to highlight material textures while producing forms that are grounded in each project’s context. While his projects often end up different in comparison to the typical surrounding architecture, his manipulation of scale and material tie the spaces wonderfully.

My research for the book I wrote about design authenticity brought me to his work and allowed me to dig deeper, appreciating his manipulation of materials as a craft on its own. I believe that this philosophy, when applied to a larger scale such as architecture, is a vital focus in design’s overall evolvement.

Since Keshia has already mentioned the criteria, let’s dive into that. Do you believe there are aspects of picking Pritzker winners that have been overlooked, such as innovation, cultural relevance, or other factors? How has this impacted deserving architects?

Infante: The Prize is determined by a body of built work, which considers all possible aspects. Nominations are either solicited or submitted, so it’s all about timing and the jury composition. I like to believe that the current landscape of the architecture industry is also an important determining factor. Like what type of practice is relevant, valuable, and important today. The overdue narrative may also play a part.

Lim: Relating to what I mentioned earlier on recognizing exceptional achievements in a particular aspect, I think it might be worthwhile to include cultural relevance and reverence to the site as part of the criteria. I noticed there are very few, or perhaps none, from Southeast Asia, even though many architects in this region, who may not yet be globally recognized, excel in vernacular architecture with profound cultural and environmental relevance.

Mondejar: I agree with Keshia! Southeast Asian, African, and indigenous architecture—despite their deep-rooted vernacular knowledge and climate-responsive strategies—have yet to receive the recognition they truly deserve. Likewise, traditional and craft-based approaches, particularly those that integrate local materials and indigenous building techniques, should have a stronger presence in the global discourse.

If gender representation is also considered, it would be inspiring to see more women architects acknowledged in future selections, further broadening the diversity of voices shaping contemporary architecture.

What are your thoughts on the Pritzker Prize selections so far? Are there other regions or types of architecture that you believe to be underrepresented?

Infante: Building on what Keshia and Joevic said, an award for an architect or firm from South East Asian would be great! Our region has been producing interesting and experimental work navigating our rich, sometimes complicated, rural and urban areas. In terms of types or areas of work, we need more recognition of practices focusing on preserving heritage and traditional architecture. How refreshing would it be to see an acknowledgment of deserving firms outside the standard, although exciting, contemporary architecture work? These practices are also important and mostly sustainable, championing the continuity of centuries-old skills, building values, and history.

Lim: It is evident that many of the previous Pritzker laureates are Western architects, which might be expected since the prize originated in the West. I’ve also learned that the selection process starts with nominations, which could narrow the pool to architects with huge global recognition, rather than those with significant local contributions that are deeply rooted in culture but may not be so exposed globally.

I can imagine that choosing Pritzker winners must be incredibly difficult, as there are many ways architecture can be excellent. But in the end, perhaps the main driver of the prize is whether or not one’s work, in one way or another, has elevated the lives of people. After all, who else is architecture for?

Uy: It is just unfortunate that smaller countries like the Philippines will have to compete with previous winners or even with the contenders for the prize. Our growth in development is far slower than the West. Despite our cultural advances in Asia from the ancient civilizations in China or Japan, for example, Europe was definitely ahead of us. It is something we cannot deny.

I think this could be the reason why we have been represented late. However, one can perhaps say that if a particular architect or firm has done so much and yet has not gained even the attention of the Pritzker foundation, then one can say it may have been underrepresented. 


Do you think the Pritzker Prize places too much emphasis on individual achievement over collaborative or collective work? Why or why not?

Infante: Probably. There is no single way to do it, but the practice of architecture is ALWAYS multidisciplinary and collaborative. The client has to be engaged and willing to be part of the process. The construction team and skilled craftsmen should share the same goal to perform. Other professionals and designers make each work holistic, effective, and robust. Stakeholders offer important and real-world insights. The practice thrives when the goal is shared. I’m glad that there are 5 partnerships and group practices awarded: Herzog and De Meuron, Sejima and Nishizawa, RCR Architects, Grafton Architects, and Lacaton and Vassal. Their recognition makes the collective nature of the practice visible. There is also a lot to learn about their dynamics.

That being said, this is not to discredit individual recipients. Coming from a practice led by two architects, I can imagine that carrying out a vision as a principal is daunting. One of my favorite Pritzker wins is 2002’s Glenn Murcutt. The jury chair commented that he “occupies a unique place in today’s architectural firmament. In an age obsessed with celebrity, the glitz of our ‘starchitects,’ backed by large staffs and copious public relations support, dominates the headlines. As a total contrast, our laureate works in a one-person office on the other side of the world from much of the architectural attention, yet has a waiting list of clients, so intent is he to give each project his personal best.” He’s admirable for his dedication and restraint.

Lim: I imagine every architectural project as a collaborative effort. However, I don’t think having a body of work represented by one person necessarily discredits the collective effort behind each project. Instead, it highlights a key figure whose vision helped shape the work, with the knowledge that architecture is never the result of just one mind or hand. But others may perceive this differently.

Mondejar: Traditionally, Pritzker has placed a strong emphasis on individual achievement, an approach that often celebrates the idea of the “starchitect,”  rather than the collective efforts that bring architecture to life. However, recent selections suggest growing recognition of collective and socially driven work. which reflects a shift in perspective toward architecture as a shared effort.

Moving forward, the Pritzker Prize could do more to recognize architecture as a team effort. It could highlight firms that work together across different fields, involve communities in design, or operate as a group rather than focusing on one person. I believe this would better demonstrate the reality that great architecture is rarely the work of one mind alone.

Uy:  If it is such a case, I honestly do not have a problem with it, as the prize is about honoring a particular architect’s body of work. Regardless if it is a collective work, it’s important to remember that it is the particular architect’s contribution that is being recognized.

If you could nominate a Filipino architect, alive or deceased, who do you think deserves the Pritzker, and what contributions make them stand out?

Infante: For his lifelong dedication to developing neo-vernacular Filipino Architecture, I will nominate Francisco Mañosa for the Pritzker Prize. I’ll never forget the impression I got from visiting his retrospective exhibit in 2017. He had a singular vision he carried throughout his body of work. He had a unique instinct for using local materials and form. I admire his braveness in rejecting Western influence to champion local. His National Artist recognition only proves his lasting legacy, which I’m glad is being carried by his family now. His Pritzker win would be a good representation for the country.

Lim: Leandro Locsin is a Filipino architect whom I think is deserving of a Pritzker. His influence on the community has lasted for generations, and the significance of his designs goes beyond their cultural impact. Locsin’s ability to use modern architecture within a Filipino context is remarkable—blending Brutalism with traditional Filipino elements, balancing tradition and modernity in a way that feels deeply connected to place. Though his work wasn’t focused on social projects, it has undoubtedly contributed to uplifting national identity.

Mondejar: I would add to Eldry’s nomination of Francisco Mañosa! He dedicated his practice to proving that the Filipino spirit could be expressed through architecture, shaping a design language that was both deeply rooted in tradition and boldly forward-thinking. His work brought Filipino identity into the modern era, preserving it through architecture that blends vernacular principles with indigenous materials. He proved that sustainability is a contemporary movement and timeless wisdom rooted in traditional Filipino design.

To me, his greatest achievement wasn’t just in the buildings he designed—it was in the movement he inspired. Mañosa ignited a generation of architects to embrace their cultural narratives rather than conform to international styles, pushing to advocate for context-driven, culturally relevant spaces.

Uy: I would also nominate Leandro Locsin. There is no doubt that his cultural projects are noteworthy. And it is how he was able to bring forth unexpected forms from basic modern applications of architecture that demonstrate his mastery of the craft.

Lastly, what do you see as the role of awards like the Pritzker in the architecture community? Do they help, hinder, or influence the profession in any particular way?

Infante: I see awards as platforms to learn about the best practices in architecture. Pritzker, with its visibility, sets their laureates to be influential figures for the industry to aspire to. Aside from the celebration of their work, it helps stir critical conversations and highlight important values and movements.

Lim: Admittedly, I hadn’t heard of the Pritzker Prize until 2016, when I had just graduated with my Bachelor’s Degree. That year, Alejandro Aravena won, and I think it was a significant moment, especially since Aravena was recognized for his work in social architecture. It was a defining point that reminded people about the sectors of the world where architecture is still less accessible. As someone about to take the next steps in the architecture profession, that moment was inspiring for me.

I later took up my Master’s Degree in Architecture which also focused largely on making architecture (housing in particular) more accessible to the public through modesign. I can imagine how it must have also inspired many other architects at the time. I noticed that more and more, architects who work on social housing projects or community-driven initiatives are being recognized. This is a good reminder that great architecture doesn’t have to be iconic or grand to be significant or valuable. It reinforces the message that architecture is, first and foremost, for the people. In this way, I believe the Pritzker can positively influence the profession.

Awards and competitions like this also inform the public about what good architecture is and can be. By educating the public and providing a better understanding of what constitutes good design, these programs already provide opportunities to elevate the profession.

Mondejar: I’d like to believe that the Pritzker Prize plays a significant role in shaping the architectural landscape by celebrating excellence, setting standards and innovations, and guiding the profession’s direction. When awarded thoughtfully, it has the power to shift conversations and priorities in the field, encouraging architects to rethink their role in addressing global challenges like climate change, housing crises, and social equity. The key is ensuring these awards reflect the evolving needs of architecture and the diverse voices shaping its future.

Uy: The Pritzker has influence in identifying which architectural practice is relevant to today’s world. By recognizing certain names, they highlight the way these architects solve common architectural problems. As a result, architects and even the public will perceive that this sort of practice is what produces architecture that is worth building. I think that this is especially relevant now, considering the tremendous attention towards the carbon footprint that a building produces.

With this, the Pritzker jury holds a huge responsibility in their hands. Their decisions have the power to create a ripple effect that can and will affect not only the future of our industry but of our built environment in general. •

Who do you think will be named as the 2025 Pritzker Prize Winner? Watch out for Kanto’s announcement on March 4, 2025! Revisit our Pritzker Prize coverage here.