Throughout the modern era, since the early 20th century, cities have been variously perceived as,
engines of economic growth “…the locus of productive economic activities and hope for the future” (M A Cohen & K S Lee, World Bank, 1991),
compared to living organisms “…as things which are born and which develop, disintegrate and die.” (J L. Sert, Can Our cities Survive? CIAM 1942),
and even been imagined as utopias composed of standardized systems and uniform patterns that “…would automatically end unemployment and all its evils” (F L. Wright, Broadacre City: A New Community Plan, Architectural Record, 1935).
These perceptions capture some essential aspects of urban life such as the economic opportunities that cities offer, the morphological growth that cities undergo, or the complex spatial patterns that cities embody. They reveal the dynamic nature of urbanism, its intricate textures and incessant evolution, driven by the vibrant variety of activities and people that create, regulate, and perpetuate the city. It is this rich urban diversity within which we situate the “urban commons”, those spaces and buildings within the city that can be shared by all its inhabitants, can accommodate all forms of social interactions, and can exemplify the city’s collective identity.
The architecture that epitomizes this quality has been described as “Urban Artifacts” by Aldo Rossi in his book “The Architecture of the City”. The quality of becoming an identity that not only resides in the minds of the people in the present, but also transcends time to create an unbroken continuity through the history of the city as a definitive descriptor of the physical space itself.
The global urban context today offers numerous examples of such spaces that are open, accessible, and expressive of the city’s public values, through community insight, citizen initiative and collective identity. The designs of these spaces, while highlighting the rich diversity of the people they represent, also uniformly demonstrate the designer’s conscious restraint and sensitivity.
From the Therme Vals in Switzerland, commissioned by the village council of Vals as a hydrotherapy center and built in 1996; to the urban marketplace of Dilli Haat in New Delhi, built in 1994 to empower the craftspeople of rural India; to the Freedom Park in Pretoria, designed in 2006 to commemorate the collective history of the struggle against apartheid; examples of urban commons can be found across the world in every country.
As the world rapidly transforms and witnesses an emergent global urban identity, it is also faced with challenges, both cultural and climatic. The United Nations also recognizes these and has designed the Sustainable Development Goals framework to address the vulnerabilities faced by cities across the world.

Objectives of the competition:
The 11th IDC 2024 invites the participants to analyze the city through this framework and identify an urban space that is potentially accessible to all and can support public functions beyond its intended use. These spaces then become the urban canvas onto which the participants must envision a design intervention that while remaining sensitive to the local context by forming an indelible association with the users, also creates a larger urban identity that would define the shared collective history of the city.
The competition lays strong emphasis on the need for a rigorous analysis of the selected site/area in terms of its accessibility, inclusivity, plurality, multiplicity, and resilience to climate induced vulnerability; as well as on creative design interventions that are citizen driven initiatives that create a collective urban identity.

Eligibility of participants:
The competition is open to architecture students from undergraduate and postgraduate streams as well as recently graduated architects.