From April to September, the Genplan Institute of Moscow conducted a competition on what could be described as “unfamiliar territory” – namely, urban research.

An interesting initiative, to say the least! Typically, architectural competitions focus on specific tasks, sites, or projects – or, conversely, delve into terminally abstract concepts. Urban research, however, is usually commissioned rather than treated as a competitive exercise. This time, after a preliminary portfolio and motivation letter review, five participants were selected to work for a symbolic fee, later divided as prize money based on rankings (from 750 000 to 250 000 rubles). Since each nomination was handled by a single participant, the competition format fell somewhere between a commissioned project and a closed-door competition.

Secondly, what does a competition for research projects entail when it comes to judging? Evaluating such work is no easy task: research quality depends on the scope of data analyzed, the depth of its interpretation, methodological nuances, and practical applicability, among other factors. How can all this be weighed simultaneously? It’s no surprise that the organizers framed the competition’s goal as “raising public awareness about urban development challenges and opportunities”. While this wording sounds quite vague, to put it mildly, I would argue the primary aim was itself an experiment – a kind of “meta-research”: testing the capacity of teams willing to tackle the outlined challenges, exploring various methodologies, assessing the time required for thorough investigation, and, most importantly, pushing boundaries beyond habitual urban planning routines. For all intents and purposes, the concept was to take familiar topics, mix them together, give them a good shake, and see what innovative ideas might emerge.

It is important to note that this was the first time the Genplan Institute of Moscow organized such a competition, embracing innovative initiatives.

“The first experience was undoubtedly a success” says the institute’s director, Tatyana Guk, “I can’t say that everything we saw during the judging process will immediately find practical application, but some ideas are definitely worth considering. There are some very viable approaches”.

, Genplan Institute of Moscow

It is important to note that each survay has a practical purpose, which is crucial for the future application of its findings. The Catalogue of Residential Environments is an analysis of extensive data on housing construction over the past five years. The result offers not only a wealth of information about existing housing morphotypes and popular architectural solutions but, most importantly, a clear understanding of residents’ preferences regarding their living environment. Together, this data forms a ready-to-use tool for designers, which can be immediately applied in practice.

• City within a City
• City Outside the City
• Universal Residential Complexes
• Urban Oases
• Residential Skyscrapers
• Business Residences
• Premium Residential Complexes

Yury Sheredega, architect, partner and co-founder of the Sheredega Consulting project consulting bureau.

In the context of the urban development boom we are witnessing, it is essential to support not only the creative but also the scientific aspects of urban planning projects. Unfortunately, examples of post-project studies are exceedingly rare. However, reflecting on existing experiences provides valuable insights into how our projects influence the urban environment after their implementation. Experimental research can yield both positive and negative results, helping us assess the current state of affairs and chart a course for future progress.

Kirill Puzanov, Academic Supervisor of the Master′s Program “Digital Urbanism and City Analytics” at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE).

Competitions that challenge us with new questions play a key role in advancing both science and practice. We should welcome such initiatives and hope that scientific research will once again become the starting point for future projects. It is crucial that the outcomes of these competitions do not go unnoticed: they must be shared with a wider audience and the expert community to spark new discussions and raise pressing issues.