A year may seem little, but in the field of artificial intelligence it is sufficient to redesign perspectives and practices. This is confirmed by the new Riba report (Royal Institute of British Architects)which updates the data collected in 2024 and gives us back the image of a profession, ours, rapidly changing.
>> Do you want to stay updated and receive articles like this? Click here, it’s free
From occasional experimentation to daily practice
In 2024, the first investigation Riba had recorded a still prudent adoption: only 41% of architecture studies declared to use AI tools. Twelve months later, the percentage rises to 60%. Ai is no longer perceived as a marginal phenomenon, but as a support that becomes part of the daily practice.
This growth must be read not only as a sign of greater confidence with the tools, but also as a response to a context in which iTOGPT applications to Midjourney, Firefly and Gemini) are now integrated in commonly used platforms. In other words: AI is no longer a “technological optional”, but a widespread infrastructure.
New opportunities, old responsibilities
The architects recognize that AI accelerates the production of design alternatives, data analysis and communication with customers. But together doubts are growing in terms of responsibility: distorted errors or content remain the responsibility of those who sign. For this reason, the report insists on the need to define clear internal policies, establish criteria of use and train staff adequately.
The theme of compensation remains delicate. Many professionals wonder if the increase in productivity brought by these tools will also translate into economic recognition, or if you risk further compressing the margins of the profession.
The Italian scenario
While Riba photographed the situation in England, in Italy the debate is linked above all to the regulatory framework. The delegated law on artificial intelligence was approved on 17 September. The text establishes general principles for transparency, correct use of data, protection of work and intellectual properties, also introducing the new crime of deepfake When images or voices are manipulated with fraudulent or defamatory purposes.
The law recalls the principles of European ACT but relaunches to subsequent decrees the definition of many practical aspects that still lack to define the boundaries and implications of these tools. For Italian architects it will be important to understand how these decrees will define the use of technologies in projects and public administration.
Towards a more mature phase
The comparison with the 2024 report highlights a change of tone. If a year ago dominated the amazement for the potential of the tools, today we think about rules, internal policies and economic repercussions. It is no longer a question of asking whether to use the AI, but how to do it consciously.
The growing adoption shows that artificial intelligence is becoming part of the common language of the profession. However, a question remains: who will define the rules? The great software developers, the great legislators or professionals themselves, through professional orders and institutions? The RIB 2025 report suggests that this is the ground on which the real game will be played: maintaining the centrality of the design choices without delegating them to the machines, and transforming the tools into real support for the quality of the work.
If you are interested in deepening the Riba investigation, you can find it at the following link:
To the next episode!
The weekly section “Architectural Prompting” is curated by the experts Luciana Mastrolia, Giovanna Panucci and Andrea Tinazzo
>> If you are interested in these themes, also sign up for the free LinkedIn newsletter Ai & Design for Technicians, let’s talk about it here!
