Fast-paced online soccer game Rematch is launching without crossplay. This was confirmed online just a few hours before the sports game launched on consoles and PC. Developers Sloclap say adding crossplay is a top priority, but many players are still

Read more...

Enterprise artificial intelligence investment is unprecedented, with IDC projecting global spending on AI and GenAI to double to $631 billion by 2028. Yet beneath the impressive budget allocations and boardroom enthusiasm lies a troubling reality: most organisations struggle to translate their AI ambitions into operational success.The sobering statistics behind AI’s promiseModelOp’s 2025 AI Governance Benchmark Report, based on input from 100 senior AI and data leaders at Fortune 500 enterprises, reveals a disconnect between aspiration and execution.While more than 80% of enterprises have 51 or more generative AI projects in proposal phases, only 18% have successfully deployed more than 20 models into production.The execution gap represents one of the most significant challenges facing enterprise AI today. Most generative AI projects still require 6 to 18 months to go live – if they reach production at all.The result is delayed returns on investment, frustrated stakeholders, and diminished confidence in AI initiatives in the enterprise.The cause: Structural, not technical barriersThe biggest obstacles preventing AI scalability aren’t technical limitations – they’re structural inefficiencies plaguing enterprise operations. The ModelOp benchmark report identifies several problems that create what experts call a “time-to-market quagmire.”Fragmented systems plague implementation. 58% of organisations cite fragmented systems as the top obstacle to adopting governance platforms. Fragmentation creates silos where different departments use incompatible tools and processes, making it nearly impossible to maintain consistent oversight in AI initiatives.Manual processes dominate despite digital transformation. 55% of enterprises still rely on manual processes – including spreadsheets and email – to manage AI use case intake. The reliance on antiquated methods creates bottlenecks, increases the likelihood of errors, and makes it difficult to scale AI operations.Lack of standardisation hampers progress. Only 23% of organisations implement standardised intake, development, and model management processes. Without these elements, each AI project becomes a unique challenge requiring custom solutions and extensive coordination by multiple teams.Enterprise-level oversight remains rare Just 14% of companies perform AI assurance at the enterprise level, increasing the risk of duplicated efforts and inconsistent oversight. The lack of centralised governance means organisations often discover they’re solving the same problems multiple times in different departments.The governance revolution: From obstacle to acceleratorA change is taking place in how enterprises view AI governance. Rather than seeing it as a compliance burden that slows innovation, forward-thinking organisations recognise governance as an important enabler of scale and speed.Leadership alignment signals strategic shift. The ModelOp benchmark data reveals a change in organisational structure: 46% of companies now assign accountability for AI governance to a Chief Innovation Officer – more than four times the number who place accountability under Legal or Compliance. This strategic repositioning reflects a new understanding that governance isn’t solely about risk management, but can enable innovation.Investment follows strategic priority. A financial commitment to AI governance underscores its importance. According to the report, 36% of enterprises have budgeted at least $1 million annually for AI governance software, while 54% have allocated resources specifically for AI Portfolio Intelligence to track value and ROI.What high-performing organisations do differentlyThe enterprises that successfully bridge the ‘execution gap’ share several characteristics in their approach to AI implementation:Standardised processes from day one. Leading organisations implement standardised intake, development, and model review processes in AI initiatives. Consistency eliminates the need to reinvent workflows for each project and ensures that all stakeholders understand their responsibilities.Centralised documentation and inventory. Rather than allowing AI assets to proliferate in disconnected systems, successful enterprises maintain centralised inventories that provide visibility into every model’s status, performance, and compliance posture.Automated governance checkpoints. High-performing organisations embed automated governance checkpoints throughout the AI lifecycle, helping ensure compliance requirements and risk assessments are addressed systematically rather than as afterthoughts.End-to-end traceability. Leading enterprises maintain complete traceability of their AI models, including data sources, training methods, validation results, and performance metrics.Measurable impact of structured governanceThe benefits of implementing comprehensive AI governance extend beyond compliance. Organisations that adopt lifecycle automation platforms reportedly see dramatic improvements in operational efficiency and business outcomes.A financial services firm profiled in the ModelOp report experienced a halving of time to production and an 80% reduction in issue resolution time after implementing automated governance processes. Such improvements translate directly into faster time-to-value and increased confidence among business stakeholders.Enterprises with robust governance frameworks report the ability to many times more models simultaneously while maintaining oversight and control. This scalability lets organisations pursue AI initiatives in multiple business units without overwhelming their operational capabilities.The path forward: From stuck to scaledThe message from industry leaders that the gap between AI ambition and execution is solvable, but it requires a shift in approach. Rather than treating governance as a necessary evil, enterprises should realise it enables AI innovation at scale.Immediate action items for AI leadersOrganisations looking to escape the ‘time-to-market quagmire’ should prioritise the following:Audit current state: Conduct an assessment of existing AI initiatives, identifying fragmented processes and manual bottlenecksStandardise workflows: Implement consistent processes for AI use case intake, development, and deployment in all business unitsInvest in integration: Deploy platforms to unify disparate tools and systems under a single governance frameworkEstablish enterprise oversight: Create centralised visibility into all AI initiatives with real-time monitoring and reporting abilitiesThe competitive advantage of getting it rightOrganisations that can solve the execution challenge will be able to bring AI solutions to market faster, scale more efficiently, and maintain the trust of stakeholders and regulators.Enterprises that continue with fragmented processes and manual workflows will find themselves disadvantaged compared to their more organised competitors. Operational excellence isn’t about efficiency but survival.The data shows enterprise AI investment will continue to grow. Therefore, the question isn’t whether organisations will invest in AI, but whether they’ll develop the operational abilities necessary to realise return on investment. The opportunity to lead in the AI-driven economy has never been greater for those willing to embrace governance as an enabler not an obstacle.(Image source: Unsplash)

Reading Time: 9 minutes In the ever-evolving landscape of customer engagement, staying ahead of the curve is not just advantageous, it’s essential. That’s why, for Chapter 7 of “The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die,” we sat down with Mirela Cialai, a seasoned expert in CRM and Martech strategies at brands like Equinox. Mirela brings a wealth of knowledge in aligning technology roadmaps with business goals, shifting organizational focuses from acquisition to retention, and leveraging hyper-personalization to drive success. In this interview, Mirela dives deep into building robust customer engagement technology roadmaps. She unveils the “PAPER” framework—Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, Refine—a simple yet effective strategy for marketers. You’ll gain insights into identifying gaps in your Martech stack, ensuring data accuracy, and prioritizing initiatives that deliver the greatest impact and ROI. Whether you’re navigating data silos, striving for cross-functional alignment, or aiming for seamless tech integration, Mirela’s expertise provides practical solutions and actionable takeaways.   Mirela Cialai Q&A Interview 1. How do you define the vision for a customer engagement platform roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals? Can you share any examples of successful visions from your experience? Defining the vision for the roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals involves creating a strategic framework that connects the team’s objectives with the organization’s overarching mission or primary objectives. This could be revenue growth, customer retention, market expansion, or operational efficiency. We then break down these goals into actionable areas where the team can contribute, such as improving engagement, increasing lifetime value, or driving acquisition. We articulate how the team will support business goals by defining the KPIs that link CRM outcomes — the team’s outcomes — to business goals. In a previous role, the CRM team I was leading faced significant challenges due to the lack of attribution capabilities and a reliance on surface-level metrics such as open rates and click-through rates to measure performance. This approach made it difficult to quantify the impact of our efforts on broader business objectives such as revenue growth. Recognizing this gap, I worked on defining a vision for the CRM team to address these shortcomings. Our vision was to drive measurable growth through enhanced data accuracy and improved attribution capabilities, which allowed us to deliver targeted, data-driven, and personalized customer experiences. To bring this vision to life, I developed a roadmap that focused on first improving data accuracy, building our attribution capabilities, and delivering personalization at scale. By aligning the vision with these strategic priorities, we were able to demonstrate the tangible impact of our efforts on the key business goals. 2. What steps did you take to ensure data accuracy? The data team was very diligent in ensuring that our data warehouse had accurate data. So taking that as the source of truth, we started cleaning the data in all the other platforms that were integrated with our data warehouse — our CRM platform, our attribution analytics platform, etc. That’s where we started, looking at all the different integrations and ensuring that the data flows were correct and that we had all the right flows in place. And also validating and cleaning our email database — that helped, having more accurate data. 3. How do you recommend shifting organizational focus from acquisition to retention within a customer engagement strategy? Shifting an organization’s focus from acquisition to retention requires a cultural and strategic shift, emphasizing the immense value that existing customers bring to long-term growth and profitability. I would start by quantifying the value of retention, showcasing how retaining customers is significantly more cost-effective than acquiring new ones. Research consistently shows that increasing retention rates by just 5% can boost profits by at least 25 to 95%. This data helps make a compelling case to stakeholders about the importance of prioritizing retention. Next, I would link retention to core business goals by demonstrating how enhancing customer lifetime value and loyalty can directly drive revenue growth. This involves shifting the organization’s focus to retention-specific metrics such as churn rate, repeat purchase rate, and customer LTV. These metrics provide actionable insights into customer behaviors and highlight the financial impact of retention initiatives, ensuring alignment with the broader company objectives. By framing retention as a driver of sustainable growth, the organization can see it not as a competing priority, but as a complementary strategy to acquisition, ultimately leading to a more balanced and effective customer engagement strategy. 4. What are the key steps in analyzing a brand’s current Martech stack capabilities to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement? Developing a clear understanding of the Martech stack’s current state and ensuring it aligns with a brand’s strategic needs and future goals requires a structured and strategic approach. The process begins with defining what success looks like in terms of technology capabilities such as scalability, integration, automation, and data accessibility, and linking these capabilities directly to the brand’s broader business objectives. I start by doing an inventory of all tools currently in use, including their purpose, owner, and key functionalities, assessing if these tools are being used to their full potential or if there are features that remain unused, and reviewing how well tools integrate with one another and with our core systems, the data warehouse. Also, comparing the capabilities of each tool and results against industry standards and competitor practices and looking for missing functionalities such as personalization, omnichannel orchestration, or advanced analytics, and identifying overlapping tools that could be consolidated to save costs and streamline workflows. Finally, review the costs of the current tools against their impact on business outcomes and identify technologies that could reduce costs, increase efficiency, or deliver higher ROI through enhanced capabilities. Establish a regular review cycle for the Martech stack to ensure it evolves alongside the business and the technological landscape. 5. How do you evaluate whether a company’s tech stack can support innovative customer-focused campaigns, and what red flags should marketers look out for? I recommend taking a structured approach and first ensure there is seamless integration across all tools to support a unified customer view and data sharing across the different channels. Determine if the stack can handle increasing data volumes, larger audiences, and additional channels as the campaigns grow, and check if it supports dynamic content, behavior-based triggers, and advanced segmentation and can process and act on data in real time through emerging technologies like AI/ML predictive analytics to enable marketers to launch responsive and timely campaigns. Most importantly, we need to ensure that the stack offers robust reporting tools that provide actionable insights, allowing teams to track performance and optimize campaigns. Some of the red flags are: data silos where customer data is fragmented across platforms and not easily accessible or integrated, inability to process or respond to customer behavior in real time, a reliance on manual intervention for tasks like segmentation, data extraction, campaign deployment, and poor scalability. If the stack struggles with growing data volumes or expanding to new channels, it won’t support the company’s evolving needs. 6. What role do hyper-personalization and timely communication play in a successful customer engagement strategy? How do you ensure they’re built into the technology roadmap? Hyper-personalization and timely communication are essential components of a successful customer engagement strategy because they create meaningful, relevant, and impactful experiences that deepen the relationship with customers, enhance loyalty, and drive business outcomes. Hyper-personalization leverages data to deliver tailored content that resonates with each individual based on their preferences, behavior, or past interactions, and timely communication ensures these personalized interactions occur at the most relevant moments, which ultimately increases their impact. Customers are more likely to engage with messages that feel relevant and align with their needs, and real-time triggers such as cart abandonment or post-purchase upsells capitalize on moments when customers are most likely to convert. By embedding these capabilities into the roadmap through data integration, AI-driven insights, automation, and continuous optimization, we can deliver impactful, relevant, and timely experiences that foster deeper customer relationships and drive long-term success. 7. What’s your approach to breaking down the customer engagement technology roadmap into manageable phases? How do you prioritize the initiatives? To create a manageable roadmap, we need to divide it into distinct phases, starting with building the foundation by addressing data cleanup, system integrations, and establishing metrics, which lays the groundwork for success. Next, we can focus on early wins and quick impact by launching behavior-based campaigns, automating workflows, and improving personalization to drive immediate value. Then we can move to optimization and expansion, incorporating predictive analytics, cross-channel orchestration, and refined attribution models to enhance our capabilities. Finally, prioritize innovation and scalability, leveraging AI/ML for hyper-personalization, scaling campaigns to new markets, and ensuring the system is equipped for future growth. By starting with foundational projects, delivering quick wins, and building towards scalable innovation, we can drive measurable outcomes while maintaining our agility to adapt to evolving needs. In terms of prioritizing initiatives effectively, I would focus on projects that deliver the greatest impact on business goals, on customer experience and ROI, while we consider feasibility, urgency, and resource availability. In the past, I’ve used frameworks like Impact Effort Matrix to identify the high-impact, low-effort initiatives and ensure that the most critical projects are addressed first. 8. How do you ensure cross-functional alignment around this roadmap? What processes have worked best for you? Ensuring cross-functional alignment requires clear communication, collaborative planning, and shared accountability. We need to establish a shared understanding of the roadmap’s purpose and how it ties to the company’s overall goals by clearly articulating the “why” behind the roadmap and how each team can contribute to its success. To foster buy-in and ensure the roadmap reflects diverse perspectives and needs, we need to involve all stakeholders early on during the roadmap development and clearly outline each team’s role in executing the roadmap to ensure accountability across the different teams. To keep teams informed and aligned, we use meetings such as roadmap kickoff sessions and regular check-ins to share updates, address challenges collaboratively, and celebrate milestones together. 9. If you were to outline a simple framework for marketers to follow when building a customer engagement technology roadmap, what would it look like? A simple framework for marketers to follow when building the roadmap can be summarized in five clear steps: Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine. In one word: PAPER. Here’s how it breaks down. Plan: We lay the groundwork for the roadmap by defining the CRM strategy and aligning it with the business goals. Audit: We evaluate the current state of our CRM capabilities. We conduct a comprehensive assessment of our tools, our data, the processes, and team workflows to identify any potential gaps. Prioritize: initiatives based on impact, feasibility, and ROI potential. Execute: by implementing the roadmap in manageable phases. Refine: by continuously improving CRM performance and refining the roadmap. So the PAPER framework — Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine — provides a structured, iterative approach allowing marketers to create a scalable and impactful customer engagement strategy. 10. What are the most common challenges marketers face in creating or executing a customer engagement strategy, and how can they address these effectively? The most critical is when the customer data is siloed across different tools and platforms, making it very difficult to get a unified view of the customer. This limits the ability to deliver personalized and consistent experiences. The solution is to invest in tools that can centralize data from all touchpoints and ensure seamless integration between different platforms to create a single source of truth. Another challenge is the lack of clear metrics and ROI measurement and the inability to connect engagement efforts to tangible business outcomes, making it very hard to justify investment or optimize strategies. The solution for that is to define clear KPIs at the outset and use attribution models to link customer interactions to revenue and other key outcomes. Overcoming internal silos is another challenge where there is misalignment between teams, which can lead to inconsistent messaging and delayed execution. A solution to this is to foster cross-functional collaboration through shared goals, regular communication, and joint planning sessions. Besides these, other challenges marketers can face are delivering personalization at scale, keeping up with changing customer expectations, resource and budget constraints, resistance to change, and others. While creating and executing a customer engagement strategy can be challenging, these obstacles can be addressed through strategic planning, leveraging the right tools, fostering collaboration, and staying adaptable to customer needs and industry trends. By tackling these challenges proactively, marketers can deliver impactful customer-centric strategies that drive long-term success. 11. What are the top takeaways or lessons that you’ve learned from building customer engagement technology roadmaps that others should keep in mind? I would say one of the most important takeaways is to ensure that the roadmap directly supports the company’s broader objectives. Whether the focus is on retention, customer lifetime value, or revenue growth, the roadmap must bridge the gap between high-level business goals and actionable initiatives. Another important lesson: The roadmap is only as effective as the data and systems it’s built upon. I’ve learned the importance of prioritizing foundational elements like data cleanup, integrations, and governance before tackling advanced initiatives like personalization or predictive analytics. Skipping this step can lead to inefficiencies or missed opportunities later on. A Customer Engagement Roadmap is a strategic tool that evolves alongside the business and its customers. So by aligning with business goals, building a solid foundation, focusing on impact, fostering collaboration, and remaining adaptable, you can create a roadmap that delivers measurable results and meaningful customer experiences.     This interview Q&A was hosted with Mirela Cialai, Director of CRM & MarTech at Equinox, for Chapter 7 of The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die. Download the PDF or request a physical copy of the book here. The post Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview appeared first on MoEngage.

Sovereignty has mattered since the invention of the nation state—defined by borders, laws, and taxes that apply within and without. While many have tried to define it, the core idea remains: nations or jurisdictions seek to stay in control, usually to the benefit of those within their borders. Digital sovereignty is a relatively new concept, also difficult to define but straightforward to understand. Data and applications don’t understand borders unless they are specified in policy terms, as coded into the infrastructure. The World Wide Web had no such restrictions at its inception. Communitarian groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, service providers and hyperscalers, non-profits and businesses all embraced a model that suggested data would look after itself. But data won’t look after itself, for several reasons. First, data is massively out of control. We generate more of it all the time, and for at least two or three decades (according to historical surveys I’ve run), most organizations haven’t fully understood their data assets. This creates inefficiency and risk—not least, widespread vulnerability to cyberattack. Risk is probability times impact—and right now, the probabilities have shot up. Invasions, tariffs, political tensions, and more have brought new urgency. This time last year, the idea of switching off another country’s IT systems was not on the radar. Now we’re seeing it happen—including the U.S. government blocking access to services overseas. Digital sovereignty isn’t just a European concern, though it is often framed as such. In South America for example, I am told that sovereignty is leading conversations with hyperscalers; in African countries, it is being stipulated in supplier agreements. Many jurisdictions are watching, assessing, and reviewing their stance on digital sovereignty. As the adage goes: a crisis is a problem with no time left to solve it. Digital sovereignty was a problem in waiting—but now it’s urgent. It’s gone from being an abstract ‘right to sovereignty’ to becoming a clear and present issue, in government thinking, corporate risk and how we architect and operate our computer systems. What does the digital sovereignty landscape look like today? Much has changed since this time last year. Unknowns remain, but much of what was unclear this time last year is now starting to solidify. Terminology is clearer – for example talking about classification and localisation rather than generic concepts. We’re seeing a shift from theory to practice. Governments and organizations are putting policies in place that simply didn’t exist before. For example, some countries are seeing “in-country” as a primary goal, whereas others (the UK included) are adopting a risk-based approach based on trusted locales. We’re also seeing a shift in risk priorities. From a risk standpoint, the classic triad of confidentiality, integrity, and availability are at the heart of the digital sovereignty conversation. Historically, the focus has been much more on confidentiality, driven by concerns about the US Cloud Act: essentially, can foreign governments see my data? This year however, availability is rising in prominence, due to geopolitics and very real concerns about data accessibility in third countries. Integrity is being talked about less from a sovereignty perspective, but is no less important as a cybercrime target—ransomware and fraud being two clear and present risks. Thinking more broadly, digital sovereignty is not just about data, or even intellectual property, but also the brain drain. Countries don’t want all their brightest young technologists leaving university only to end up in California or some other, more attractive country. They want to keep talent at home and innovate locally, to the benefit of their own GDP. How Are Cloud Providers Responding? Hyperscalers are playing catch-up, still looking for ways to satisfy the letter of the law whilst ignoring (in the French sense) its spirit. It’s not enough for Microsoft or AWS to say they will do everything they can to protect a jurisdiction’s data, if they are already legally obliged to do the opposite. Legislation, in this case US legislation, calls the shots—and we all know just how fragile this is right now. We see hyperscaler progress where they offer technology to be locally managed by a third party, rather than themselves. For example, Google’s partnership with Thales, or Microsoft with Orange, both in France (Microsoft has similar in Germany). However, these are point solutions, not part of a general standard. Meanwhile, AWS’ recent announcement about creating a local entity doesn’t solve for the problem of US over-reach, which remains a core issue. Non-hyperscaler providers and software vendors have an increasingly significant play: Oracle and HPE offer solutions that can be deployed and managed locally for example; Broadcom/VMware and Red Hat provide technologies that locally situated, private cloud providers can host. Digital sovereignty is thus a catalyst for a redistribution of “cloud spend” across a broader pool of players. What Can Enterprise Organizations Do About It? First, see digital sovereignty as a core element of data and application strategy. For a nation, sovereignty means having solid borders, control over IP, GDP, and so on. That’s the goal for corporations as well—control, self-determination, and resilience. If sovereignty isn’t seen as an element of strategy, it gets pushed down into the implementation layer, leading to inefficient architectures and duplicated effort. Far better to decide up front what data, applications and processes need to be treated as sovereign, and defining an architecture to support that. This sets the scene for making informed provisioning decisions. Your organization may have made some big bets on key vendors or hyperscalers, but multi-platform thinking increasingly dominates: multiple public and private cloud providers, with integrated operations and management. Sovereign cloud becomes one element of a well-structured multi-platform architecture. It is not cost-neutral to deliver on sovereignty, but the overall business value should be tangible. A sovereignty initiative should bring clear advantages, not just for itself, but through the benefits that come with better control, visibility, and efficiency. Knowing where your data is, understanding which data matters, managing it efficiently so you’re not duplicating or fragmenting it across systems—these are valuable outcomes. In addition, ignoring these questions can lead to non-compliance or be outright illegal. Even if we don’t use terms like ‘sovereignty’, organizations need a handle on their information estate. Organizations shouldn’t be thinking everything cloud-based needs to be sovereign, but should be building strategies and policies based on data classification, prioritization and risk. Build that picture and you can solve for the highest-priority items first—the data with the strongest classification and greatest risk. That process alone takes care of 80–90% of the problem space, avoiding making sovereignty another problem whilst solving nothing. Where to start? Look after your own organization first Sovereignty and systems thinking go hand in hand: it’s all about scope. In enterprise architecture or business design, the biggest mistake is boiling the ocean—trying to solve everything at once. Instead, focus on your own sovereignty. Worry about your own organization, your own jurisdiction. Know where your own borders are. Understand who your customers are, and what their requirements are. For example, if you’re a manufacturer selling into specific countries—what do those countries require? Solve for that, not for everything else. Don’t try to plan for every possible future scenario. Focus on what you have, what you’re responsible for, and what you need to address right now. Classify and prioritise your data assets based on real-world risk. Do that, and you’re already more than halfway toward solving digital sovereignty—with all the efficiency, control, and compliance benefits that come with it. Digital sovereignty isn’t just regulatory, but strategic. Organizations that act now can reduce risk, improve operational clarity, and prepare for a future based on trust, compliance, and resilience. The post Reclaiming Control: Digital Sovereignty in 2025 appeared first on Gigaom.

June 13, 20255 min readFive Climate Issues to Watch When Trump Goes to CanadaPresident Trump will attend the G7 summit on Sunday in a nation he threatened to annex. He will also be an outlier on climate issuesBy Sara Schonhardt & E&E News Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty ImagesCLIMATEWIRE | The world’s richest nations are gathering Sunday in the Canadian Rockies for a summit that could reveal whether President Donald Trump's policies are shaking global climate efforts.The Group of Seven meeting comes at a challenging time for international climate policy. Trump’s tariff seesaw has cast a shade over the global economy, and his domestic policies have threatened billions of dollars in funding for clean energy programs. Those pressures are colliding with record-breaking temperatures worldwide and explosive demand for energy, driven by power-hungry data centers linked to artificial intelligence technologies.On top of that, Trump has threatened to annex the host of the meeting — Canada — and members of his Cabinet have taken swipes at Europe’s use of renewable energy. Rather than being aligned with much of the world's assertion that fossil fuels should be tempered, Trump embraces the opposite position — drill for more oil and gas and keep burning coal, while repealing environmental regulations on the biggest sources of U.S. carbon pollution.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.Those moves illustrate his rejection of climate science and underscore his outlying positions on global warming in the G7.Here are five things to know about the summit.Who will be there?The group comprises Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States — plus the European Union. Together they account for more than 40 percent of gross domestic product globally and around a quarter of all energy-related carbon dioxide pollution, according to the International Energy Agency. The U.S. is the only one among them that is not trying to hit a carbon reduction goal.Some emerging economies have also been invited, including Mexico, India, South Africa and Brazil, the host of this year’s COP30 climate talks in November.Ahead of the meeting, the office of Canada's prime minister, Mark Carney, said he and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva agreed to strengthen cooperation on energy security and critical minerals. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump would be having "quite a few" bilateral meetings but that his schedule was in flux.The G7 first came together 50 years ago following the Arab oil embargo. Since then, its seven members have all joined the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. The U.S. is the only nation in the group that has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, which counts almost every country in the world as a signatory.What’s on the table?Among Canada’s top priorities as host are strengthening energy security and fortifying critical mineral supply chains. Carney would also like to see some agreement on joint wildfire action.Expanding supply chains for critical minerals — and competing more aggressively with China over those resources — could be areas of common ground among the leaders. Climate change is expected to remain divisive. Looming over the discussions will be tariffs — which Trump has applied across the board — because they will have an impact on the clean energy transition.“I think probably the majority of the conversation will be less about climate per se, or certainly not using climate action as the frame, but more about energy transition and infrastructure as a way of kind of bridging the known gaps between most of the G7 and where the United States is right now,” said Dan Baer, director of the Europe program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.What are the possible outcomes?The leaders could issue a communique at the end of their meeting, but those statements are based on consensus, something that would be difficult to reach without other G7 countries capitulating to Trump. Bloomberg reported Wednesday that nations won’t try to reach a joint agreement, in part because bridging gaps on climate change could be too hard.Instead, Carney could issue a chair’s summary or joint statements based on certain issues.The question is how far Canada will go to accommodate the U.S., which could try to roll back past statements on advancing clean energy, said Andrew Light, former assistant secretary of Energy for international affairs, who led ministerial-level negotiations for the G7.“They might say, rather than watering everything down that we accomplished in the last four years, we just do a chair's statement, which summarizes the debate,” Light said. “That will show you that you didn't get consensus, but you also didn't get capitulation.”What to watch forIf there is a communique, Light says he’ll be looking for whether there is tougher language on China and any signal of support for science and the Paris Agreement. During his first term, Trump refused to support the Paris accord in the G7 and G20 declarations.The statement could avoid climate and energy issues entirely. But if it backtracks on those issues, that could be a sign that countries made a deal by trading climate-related language for something else, Light said.Baer of Carnegie said a statement framed around energy security and infrastructure could be seen as a “pragmatic adaptation” to the U.S. administration, rather than an indication that other leaders aren’t concerned about climate change.Climate activists have lower expectations.“Realistically, we can expect very little, if any, mention of climate change,” said Caroline Brouillette, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada.“The message we should be expecting from those leaders is that climate action remains a priority for the rest of the G7 … whether it's on the transition away from fossil fuels and supporting developing countries through climate finance,” she said. “Especially now that the U.S. is stepping back, we need countries, including Canada, to be stepping up.”Best- and worst-case scenariosThe challenge for Carney will be preventing any further rupture with Trump, analysts said.In 2018, Trump made a hasty exit from the G7 summit, also in Canada that year, due largely to trade disagreements. He retracted his support for the joint statement.“The best, [most] realistic case outcome is that things don't get worse,” said Baer.The worst-case scenario? Some kind of “highly personalized spat” that could add to the sense of disorder, he added.“I think the G7 on the one hand has the potential to be more important than ever, as fewer and fewer platforms for international cooperation seem to be able to take action,” Baer said. “So it's both very important and also I don't have super-high expectations.”Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2025. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd" Japanese architect Shigeru Ban has created the Blue Ocean Dome (BOD) for the Osaka-Kansai Expo 2025, addressing the urgent issue of marine plastic pollution and raising crucial awareness about it.Named Blue Ocean Dome, the pavilion stands out with its innovative design, comprising three distinct dome types: Dome A, Dome B, and Dome C. Each dome is specifically crafted to host captivating installations and dynamic exhibitions, promising an unforgettable experience for all visitors throughout the event. Image © Taiki FukaoThe project was commissioned by the Zero Emissions Research and Initiatives (ZERI), a global network of creative minds, seeking solutions to the ever increasing problems of the world.Rather than outright rejecting plastic, the pavilion inspires deep reflection on how we use and manage materials, highlighting our critical responsibility to make sustainable choices for the future.The BOD merges traditional and modern materials—like bamboo, paper, and carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP)—to unlock new and innovative architectural possibilities.Dome A, serving as the striking entrance, is expertly crafted from laminated bamboo. This innovative design not only showcases the beauty of bamboo but also tackles the pressing issue of abandoned bamboo groves in Japan, which pose a risk to land stability due to their shallow root systems.Utilizing raw bamboo for structural purposes is often difficult; however, through advanced processing, it is transformed into thin, laminated boards that boast strength even greater than that of conventional wood. These boards have been skillfully fashioned into a remarkable 19-meter dome, drawing inspiration from traditional Japanese bamboo hats. This project brilliantly turns an environmental challenge into a sustainable architectural solution, highlighting the potential of bamboo as a valuable resource.Dome B stands as the central and largest structure of its kind, boasting a remarkable diameter of 42 meters. It is primarily constructed from Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP), a cutting-edge material revered for its extraordinary strength-to-weight ratio—four times stronger than steel yet only one-fifth the weight. While CFRP is predominantly seen in industries such as aerospace and automotive due to its high cost, its application in architecture is pioneering.In this project, the choice of CFRP was not just advantageous; it was essential. The primary goal was to minimize the foundation weight on the reclaimed land of the Expo site, making sustainability a top priority. To mitigate the environmental consequences of deep foundation piles, the structure had to be lighter than the soil excavated for its foundation. CFRP not only met this stringent requirement but also ensured the dome's structural integrity, showcasing a perfect marriage of innovation and environmental responsibility.Dome C, with its impressive 19-meter diameter, is crafted entirely from paper tubes that are 100% recyclable after use. Its innovative design features a three-dimensional truss structure, connected by elegant wooden spheres, evoking the beauty of molecular structures.To champion sustainability and minimize waste following the six-month Expo, the entire BOD pavilion has been meticulously designed for effortless disassembly and relocation. It is anchored by a robust steel foundation system and boasts a modular design that allows it to be conveniently packed into standard shipping containers. After the Expo concludes, this remarkable pavilion will be transported to the Maldives, where it will be transformed into a stunning resort facility, breathing new life into its design and purpose.Recently, Shigeru Ban's Paper Log House was revealed at Philip Johnson's Glass House Venue. In addition, Ban installed his Paper Partition Shelters (PPS) for the victims of the Turkey-Syria earthquake in Mersin and Hatay provinces of Turkey.All images © Hiroyuki Hirai unless otherwise stated.> via Shigeru Ban Architects 

Microsoft offered up a fairly light Patch Tuesday release this month, with 68 patches to Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. There were no updates for Exchange or SQL server and just two minor patches for Microsoft Edge. That said, two zero-day vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-33073 and CVE-2025-33053) have led to a “Patch Now” recommendation for both Windows and Office. (Developers can follow their usual release cadence with updates to Microsoft .NET and Visual Studio.) To help navigate these changes, the team from Readiness has provided auseful  infographic detailing the risks involved when deploying the latest updates. (More information about recent Patch Tuesday releases is available here.) Known issues Microsoft released a limited number of known issues for June, with a product-focused issue and a very minor display concern: Microsoft Excel: This a rare product level entry in the “known issues” category — an advisory that “square brackets” or [] are not supported in Excel filenames. An error is generated, advising the user to remove the offending characters. Windows 10: There are reports of blurry or unclear CJK (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) text when displayed at 96 DPI (100% scaling) in Chromium-based browsers such as Microsoft Edge and Google Chrome. This is a limited resource issue, as the font resolution in Windows 10 does not fully match the high-level resolution of the Noto font. Microsoft recommends changing the display scaling to 125% or 150% to improve clarity. Major revisions and mitigations Microsoft might have won an award for the shortest time between releasing an update and a revision with: CVE-2025-33073: Windows SMB Client Elevation of Privilege. Microsoft worked to address a vulnerability where improper access control in Windows SMB allows an attacker to elevate privileges over a network. This patch was revised on the same day as its initial release (and has been revised again for documentation purposes). Windows lifecycle and enforcement updates Microsoft did not release any enforcement updates for June. Each month, the Readiness team analyzes Microsoft’s latest updates and provides technically sound, actionable testing plans. While June’s release includes no stated functional changes, many foundational components across authentication, storage, networking, and user experience have been updated. For this testing guide, we grouped Microsoft’s updates by Windows feature and then accompanied the section with prescriptive test actions and rationale to help prioritize enterprise efforts. Core OS and UI compatibility Microsoft updated several core kernel drivers affecting Windows as a whole. This is a low-level system change and carries a high risk of compatibility and system issues. In addition, core Microsoft print libraries have been included in the update, requiring additional print testing in addition to the following recommendations: Run print operations from 32-bit applications on 64-bit Windows environments. Use different print drivers and configurations (e.g., local, networked). Observe printing from older productivity apps and virtual environments. Remote desktop and network connectivity This update could impact the reliability of remote access while broken DHCP-to-DNS integration can block device onboarding, and NAT misbehavior disrupts VPNs or site-to-site routing configurations. We recommend the following tests be performed: Create and reconnect Remote Desktop (RDP) sessions under varying network conditions. Confirm that DHCP-assigned IP addresses are correctly registered with DNS in AD-integrated environments. Test modifying NAT and routing settings in RRAS configurations and ensure that changes persist across reboots. Filesystem, SMB and storage Updates to the core Windows storage libraries affect nearly every command related to Microsoft Storage Spaces. A minor misalignment here can result in degraded clusters, orphaned volumes, or data loss in a failover scenario. These are high-priority components in modern data center and hybrid cloud infrastructure, with the following storage-related testing recommendations: Access file shares using server names, FQDNs, and IP addresses. Enable and validate encrypted and compressed file-share operations between clients and servers. Run tests that create, open, and read from system log files using various file and storage configurations. Validate core cluster storage management tasks, including creating and managing storage pools, tiers, and volumes. Test disk addition/removal, failover behaviors, and resiliency settings. Run system-level storage diagnostics across active and passive nodes in the cluster. Windows installer and recovery Microsoft delivered another update to the Windows Installer (MSI) application infrastructure. Broken or regressed Installer package MSI handling disrupts app deployment pipelines while putting core business applications at risk. We suggest the following tests for the latest changes to MSI Installer, Windows Recovery and Microsoft’s Virtualization Based Security (VBS): Perform installation, repair, and uninstallation of MSI Installer packages using standard enterprise deployment tools (e.g. Intune). Validate restore point behavior for points older than 60 days under varying virtualization-based security (VBS) settings. Check both client and server behaviors for allowed or blocked restores. We highly recommend prioritizing printer testing this month, then remote desktop deployment testing to ensure your core business applications install and uninstall as expected. Each month, we break down the update cycle into product families (as defined by Microsoft) with the following basic groupings:  Browsers (Microsoft IE and Edge); Microsoft Windows (both desktop and server); Microsoft Office; Microsoft Exchange and SQL Server;  Microsoft Developer Tools (Visual Studio and .NET); And Adobe (if you get this far). Browsers Microsoft delivered a very minor series of updates to Microsoft Edge. The  browser receives two Chrome patches (CVE-2025-5068 and CVE-2025-5419) where both updates are rated important. These low-profile changes can be added to your standard release calendar. Microsoft Windows Microsoft released five critical patches and (a smaller than usual) 40 patches rated important. This month the five critical Windows patches cover the following desktop and server vulnerabilities: Missing release of memory after effective lifetime in Windows Cryptographic Services (WCS) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. Use after free in Windows Remote Desktop Services allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. Use after free in Windows KDC Proxy Service (KPSSVC) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. Use of uninitialized resources in Windows Netlogon allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network. Unfortunately, CVE-2025-33073 has been reported as publicly disclosed while CVE-2025-33053 has been reported as exploited. Given these two zero-days, the Readiness recommends a “Patch Now” release schedule for your Windows updates. Microsoft Office Microsoft released five critical updates and a further 13 rated important for Office. The critical patches deal with memory related and “use after free” memory allocation issues affecting the entire platform. Due to the number and severity of these issues, we recommend a “Patch Now” schedule for Office for this Patch Tuesday release. Microsoft Exchange and SQL Server There are no updates for either Microsoft Exchange or SQL Server this month.  Developer tools There were only three low-level updates (product focused and rated important) released, affecting .NET and Visual Studio. Add these updates to your standard developer release schedule. Adobe (and 3rd party updates) Adobe has released (but Microsoft has not co-published) a single update to Adobe Acrobat (APSB25-57). There were two other non-Microsoft updated releases affecting the Chromium platform, which were covered in the Browser section above.

These annual rankings were last updated on June 13, 2025. Want to see your firm on next year’s list? Continue reading for more on how you can improve your studio’s ranking. New Zealand is a one-of-a-kind island in the Pacific, famous for its indigenous Maori architecture. The country has managed to preserve an array of historical aboriginal ruins, such as marae (meeting grounds) and wharenui (meeting houses), despite its European colonization during the 19th century. Apart from the country’s ancient ruins, New Zealand is also home to several notable architectural landmarks like the famous Sky Tower piercing the Auckland skyline to the organic forms of the Te Papa Tongarewa Museum in Wellington. Renowned architects like Sir Ian Athfield, whose works blend modernist principles with a deep respect for the natural landscape, have left an indelible mark on the country’s architectural legacy. Being home to a stunning tropical landscape, New Zealand architects have developed eco-friendly residential designs that harness the power of renewable energy as well as visionary urban developments prioritizing livability and connectivity. A notable example is Turanga Central Library in Christchurch, a project that exceeds all eco-friendly design standards and benchmark emissions. Finally, concepts like passive design are increasingly becoming standard practice in architectural circles. With so many architecture firms to choose from, it’s challenging for clients to identify the industry leaders that will be an ideal fit for their project needs. Fortunately, Architizer is able to provide guidance on the top design firms in New Zealand based on more than a decade of data and industry knowledge. How are these architecture firms ranked? The following ranking has been created according to key statistics that demonstrate each firm’s level of architectural excellence. The following metrics have been accumulated to establish each architecture firm’s ranking, in order of priority: The number of A+Awards won (2013 to 2025) The number of A+Awards finalists (2013 to 2025) The number of projects selected as “Project of the Day” (2009 to 2025) The number of projects selected as “Featured Project” (2009 to 2025) The number of projects uploaded to Architizer (2009 to 2025) Each of these metrics is explained in more detail at the foot of this article. This ranking list will be updated annually, taking into account new achievements of New Zealand architecture firms throughout the year. Without further ado, here are the 30 best architecture firms in New Zealand: 30. CoLab Architecture © CoLab Architecture Ltd CoLab Architecture is a small practice of two directors, Tobin Smith and Blair Paterson, based in Christchurch New Zealand. Tobin is a creative designer with a wealth of experience in the building industry. Blair is a registered architect and graduate from the University of Auckland. “We like architecture to be visually powerful, intellectually elegant, and above all timeless. For us, timeless design is achieved through simplicity and strength of concept — in other words, a single idea executed beautifully with a dedication to the details. We strive to create architecture that is conscious of local climate (hunker down in the winter and open up in summer) and the environment (scale and relationship to other buildings and the natural environment).” Some of CoLab Architecture’s most prominent projects include: Urban Cottage, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped CoLab Architecture Ltd achieve 30th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 29. Paul Whittaker © Paul Whittaker Paul Whittaker is an architecture firm based in New Zealand. Its work revolves around residential architecture. Some of Paul Whittaker’s most prominent projects include: Whittaker Cube, Kakanui, New Zealand The following statistics helped Paul Whittaker achieve 29th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 28. Space Division © Simon Devitt Photographer Space Division is a boutique architectural practice that aims to positively impact the lives and environment of its clients and their communities by purposefully producing quality space. We believe our name reflects both the essence of what we do, but also how we strive to do it – succinctly and simply. Our design process is inclusive and client focused with their desires, physical constraints, budgets, time frames, compliance and construction processes all carefully considered and incorporated into our designs. Space Division has successfully applied this approach to a broad range of project types within the field of architecture, ranging from commercial developments, urban infrastructure to baches, playhouses and residential homes. Space Divisions team is committed to delivering a very personal and complete service to each of their clients, at each stage of the process. To assist in achieving this Space Division collaborates with a range of trusted technical specialists, based on the specific needs of our client. Which ensures we stay focussed, passionate agile and easily scalable. Some of Space Division’s most prominent projects include: Stradwick House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Space Division achieve 28th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 27. Sumich Chaplin Architects © Sumich Chaplin Architects Sumich Chaplin Architects undertake to provide creative, enduring architectural design based on a clear understanding and interpretation of a client’s brief. We work with an appreciation and respect for the surrounding landscape and environment. Some of Sumich Chaplin Architects’ most prominent projects include: Millbrook House, Arrowtown, New Zealand The following statistics helped Sumich Chaplin Architects achieve 27th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 26. Daniel Marshall Architects © Simon Devitt Photographer Daniel Marshall Architects (DMA) is an Auckland based practice who are passionate about designing high quality and award winning New Zealand architecture. Our work has been published in periodicals and books internationally as well as numerous digital publications. Daniel leads a core team of four individually accomplished designers who skillfully collaborate to resolve architectural projects from their conception through to their occupation. DMA believe architecture is a ‘generalist’ profession which engages with all components of an architectural project; during conceptual design, documentation and construction phases.  We pride ourselves on being able to holistically engage with a complex of architectural issues to arrive at a design solution equally appropriate to its context (site and surrounds) and the unique ways our clients prefer to live. Some of Daniel Marshall Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lucerne, Auckland, New Zealand House in Herne Bay, Herne Bay, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Daniel Marshall Architects achieve 26th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 2 25. AW Architects © AW Architects Creative studio based in Christchurch, New Zealand. AW-ARCH is committed to an inclusive culture where everyone is encouraged to share their perspectives – our partners, our colleagues and our clients. Our team comes from all over the globe, bringing with them a variety of experiences. We embrace the differences that shape people’s lives, including race, ethnicity, identity and ability. We come together around the drawing board, the monitor, and the lunch table, immersed in the free exchange of ideas and synthesizing the diverse viewpoints of creative people, which stimulates innovative design and makes our work possible. Mentorship is key to engagement within AW-ARCH, energizing our studio and feeding invention. It’s our social and professional responsibility and helps us develop and retain a dedicated team. This includes offering internships that introduce young people to our profession, as well as supporting opportunities for our people outside the office — teaching, volunteering and exploring. Some of AW Architects’ most prominent projects include: OCEAN VIEW TERRACE HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand 212 CASHEL STREET, Christchurch, New Zealand LAKE HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand RIVER HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand HE PUNA TAIMOANA, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped AW Architects achieve 25th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 1 Total Projects 9 24. Archimedia © Patrick Reynolds Archimedia is a New Zealand architecture practice with NZRAB and green star accredited staff, offering design services in the disciplines of architecture, interiors and ecology. Delivering architecture involves intervention in both natural eco-systems and the built environment — the context within which human beings live their lives. Archimedia uses the word “ecology” to extend the concept of sustainability to urban design and master planning and integrates this holistic strategy into every project. Archimedia prioritizes client project requirements, functionality, operational efficiency, feasibility and programme. Some of Archimedia’s most prominent projects include: Te Oro, Auckland, New Zealand Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tamaki, Auckland, New Zealand Hekerua Bay Residence, New Zealand Eye Institute , Remuera, Auckland, New Zealand University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Archimedia achieve 24th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 25 23. MC Architecture Studio © MC Architecture Studio Ltd The studio’s work, questioning the boundary between art and architecture, provides engaging and innovative living space with the highest sustainability standard. Design solutions are tailored on client needs and site’s characteristics. Hence the final product will be unique and strongly related to the context and wider environment. On a specific-project basis, the studio, maintaining the leadership of the whole process, works in a network with local and international practices to achieve the best operational efficiency and local knowledge worldwide to accommodate the needs of a big scale project or specific requirements. Some of MC Architecture Studio’s most prominent projects include: Cass Bay House, Cass Bay, Lyttelton, New Zealand Ashburton Alteration, Ashburton, New Zealand restaurant/cafe, Ovindoli, Italy Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped MC Architecture Studio Ltd achieve 23rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 19 22. Architecture van Brandenburg © Architecture van Brandenburg Van Brandenburg is a design focused studio for architecture, landscape architecture, urbanism, and product design with studios in Queenstown and Dunedin, New Zealand. With global reach Van Brandenburg conducts themselves internationally, where the team of architects, designers and innovators create organic built form, inspired by nature, and captured by curvilinear design. Some of Architecture van Brandenburg’s most prominent projects include: Marisfrolg Fashion Campus, Shenzhen, China The following statistics helped Architecture van Brandenburg achieve 22nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 21. MacKayCurtis © MacKayCurtis MacKay Curtis is a design led practice with a mission to create functional architecture of lasting beauty that enhances peoples lives. Some of MacKayCurtis’ most prominent projects include: Mawhitipana House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped MacKayCurtis achieve 21st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 20. Gerrad Hall Architects © Gerrad Hall Architects We aspire to create houses that are a joyful sensory experience. Some of Gerrad Hall Architects’ most prominent projects include: Inland House, Mangawhai, New Zealand Herne Bay Villa Alteration, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Gerrad Hall Architects achieve 20th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 2 19. Dorrington Atcheson Architects © Dorrington Atcheson Architects Dorrington Atcheson Architects was founded as Dorrington Architects & Associates was formed in 2010, resulting in a combined 20 years of experience in the New Zealand architectural market. We’re a boutique architecture firm working on a range of projects and budgets. We love our work, we pride ourselves on the work we do and we enjoy working with our clients to achieve a result that resolves their brief. The design process is a collaborative effort, working with the client, budget, site and brief, to find unique solutions that solve the project at hand. The style of our projects are determined by the site and the budget, with a leaning towards contemporary modernist design, utilizing a rich natural material palette, creating clean and tranquil spaces. Some of Dorrington Atcheson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lynch Street Coopers Beach House, Coopers Beach, New Zealand Rutherford House, Tauranga Taupo, New Zealand Winsomere Cres Kathryn Wilson Shoebox, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Dorrington Atcheson Architects achieve 19th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 14 18. Andrew Barre Lab © Marcela Grassi Andrew Barrie Lab is an architectural practice that undertakes a diverse range of projects. We make buildings, books, maps, classes, exhibitions and research. Some of Andrew Barre Lab’s most prominent projects include: Learning from Trees, Venice, Italy The following statistics helped Andrew Barre Lab achieve 18th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 2 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 17. Warren and Mahoney © Simon Devitt Photographer Warren and Mahoney is an insight led multidisciplinary architectural practice with six locations functioning as a single office. Our clients and projects span New Zealand, Australia and the Pacific Rim. The practice has over 190 people, comprising of specialists working across the disciplines of architecture, workplace, masterplanning, urban design and sustainable design. We draw from the wider group for skills and experience on every project, regardless of the location. Some of Warren and Mahoney’s most prominent projects include: MIT Manukau & Transport Interchange, Auckland, New Zealand Carlaw Park Student Accommodation, Auckland, New Zealand Pt Resolution Footbridge, Auckland, New Zealand Isaac Theatre Royal, Christchurch, New Zealand University of Auckland Recreation and Wellness Centre, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Warren and Mahoney achieve 17th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 5 16. South Architects Limited © South Architects Limited Led by Craig South, our friendly professional team is dedicated to crafting for uniqueness and producing carefully considered architecture that will endure and be loved. At South Architects, every project has a unique story. This story starts and ends with our clients, whose values and aspirations fundamentally empower and inspire our whole design process. Working together with our clients is pivotal to how we operate and we share a passion for innovation in design. We invite you to meet us and explore what we can do for you. As you will discover, our client focussed process is thorough, robust and responsive. We see architecture as the culmination of a journey with you. Some of South Architects Limited’s most prominent projects include: Three Gables, Christchurch, New Zealand Concrete Copper Home, Christchurch, New Zealand Driftwood Home, Christchurch, New Zealand Half Gable Townhouses, Christchurch, New Zealand Kilmore Street, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped South Architects Limited achieve 16th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 6 15. Pac Studio © Pac Studio Pac Studio is an ideas-driven design office, committed to intellectual and artistic rigor and fueled by a strong commitment to realizing ideas in the world. We believe a thoughtful and inclusive approach to design, which puts people at the heart of any potential solution, is the key to compelling and positive architecture. Through our relationships with inter-related disciplines — furniture, art, landscape and academia — we can create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. We are open to unconventional propositions. We are architects and designers with substantial experience delivering highly awarded architectural projects on multiple scales. Some of Pac Studio’s most prominent projects include: Space Invader, Auckland, New Zealand Split House, Auckland, New Zealand Yolk House, Auckland, New Zealand Wanaka Crib, Wanaka, New Zealand Pahi House, Pahi, New Zealand The following statistics helped Pac Studio achieve 15th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 8 14. Jasmax © Jasmax Jasmax is one of New Zealand’s largest and longest established architecture and design practices. With over 250 staff nationwide, the practice has delivered some of the country’s most well known projects, from the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa to major infrastructure and masterplanning projects such as Auckland’s Britomart Station. From our four regional offices, the practice works with clients, stakeholders and communities across the following sectors: commercial, cultural and civic, education, infrastructure, health, hospitality, retail, residential, sports and recreation, and urban design. Environmentally sustainable design is part of everything we do, and we were proud to work with Ngāi Tūhoe to design one of New Zealand’s most advanced sustainable buildings, Te Uru Taumatua; which has been designed to the stringent criteria of the International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge. Some of Jasmax’s most prominent projects include: The Surf Club at Muriwai, Muriwai, New Zealand Auckland University Mana Hauora Building, Auckland, New Zealand The Fonterra Centre, Auckland, New Zealand Auckland University of Technology Sir Paul Reeves Building , Auckland, New Zealand NZI Centre, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Jasmax achieve 14th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 21 13. Condon Scott Architects © Condon Scott Architects Condon Scott Architects is a boutique, award-winning NZIA registered architectural practice based in Wānaka, New Zealand. Since inception 35 years ago, Condon Scott Architects has been involved in a wide range of high end residential and commercial architectural projects throughout Queenstown, Wānaka, the Central Otago region and further afield. Director Barry Condon (ANZIA) and principal Sarah Scott (FNZIA) – both registered architects – work alongside a highly skilled architectural team to deliver a full design and construction management service. This spans from initial concept design right through to tender management and interior design. Condon Scott Architect’s approach is to view each commission as a bespoke and site specific project, capitalizing on the unique environmental conditions and natural surroundings that are so often evident in this beautiful part of the world. Some of Condon Scott Architects’ most prominent projects include: Sugi House, Wānaka, New Zealand Wanaka Catholic Church, Wanaka, New Zealand Mount Iron Barn, Wanaka, New Zealand Bendigo Terrace House, New Zealand Bargour Residence, Wanaka, New Zealand The following statistics helped Condon Scott Architects achieve 13th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 17 12. Glamuzina Paterson Architects © Glamuzina Paterson Architects Glamuzina Architects is an Auckland based practice established in 2014. We strive to produce architecture that is crafted, contextual and clever. Rather than seeking a particular outcome we value a design process that is rigorous and collaborative. When designing we look to the context of a project beyond just its immediate physical location to the social, political, historical and economic conditions of place. This results in architecture that is uniquely tailored to the context it sits within. We work on many different types of projects across a range of scales; from small interiors to large public buildings. Regardless of a project’s budget we always prefer to work smart, using a creative mix of materials, light and volume in preference to elaborate finishes or complex detailing. Some of Glamuzina Paterson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lake Hawea Courtyard House, Otago, New Zealand Blackpool House, Auckland, New Zealand Brick Bay House, Auckland, New Zealand Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Glamuzina Paterson Architects achieve 12th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 5 11. Cheshire Architects © Patrick Reynolds Cheshire Architects does special projects, irrespective of discipline, scale or type. The firm moves fluidly from luxury retreat to city master plan to basement cocktail den, shaping every aspect of an environment in pursuit of the extraordinary. Some of Cheshire Architects’ most prominent projects include: Rore kahu, Te Tii, New Zealand Eyrie, New Zealand Milse, Takanini, New Zealand The following statistics helped Cheshire Architects achieve 11th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 3 10. Patterson Associates © Patterson Associates Pattersons Associates Architects began its creative story with architect Andrew Patterson in 1986 whose early work on New Zealand’s unspoiled coasts, explores relationships between people and landscape to create a sense of belonging. The architecture studio started based on a very simple idea; if a building can feel like it naturally ‘belongs,’ or fits logically in a place, to an environment, a time and culture, then the people that inhabit the building will likely feel a sense of belonging there as well. This methodology connects theories of beauty, confidence, economy and comfort. In 2004 Davor Popadich and Andrew Mitchell joined the firm as directors, taking it to another level of creative exploration and helping it grow into an architecture studio with an international reputation. Some of Patterson Associates’ most prominent projects include: Seascape Retreat, Canterbury, New Zealand The Len Lye Centre, New Plymouth, New Zealand Country House in the City, Auckland, New Zealand Scrubby Bay House, Canterbury, New Zealand Parihoa House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Patterson Associates achieve 10th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 5 9. Team Green Architects © Team Green Architects Established in 2013 by Sian Taylor and Mark Read, Team Green Architects is a young committed practice focused on designing energy efficient buildings. Some of Team Green Architects’ most prominent projects include: Dalefield Guest House, Queenstown, New Zealand Olive Grove House, Cromwell, New Zealand Hawthorn House, Queenstown, New Zealand Frankton House, Queenstown, New Zealand Contemporary Sleepout, Arthurs Point, New Zealand The following statistics helped Team Green Architects achieve 9th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 7 8. Creative Arch © Creative Arch Creative Arch is an award-winning, multi-disciplined architectural design practice, founded in 1998 by architectural designer and director Mark McLeay. The range of work at Creative Arch is as diverse as our clients, encompassing residential homes, alterations and renovations, coastal developments, sub-division developments, to commercial projects. The team at Creative Arch are an enthusiastic group of talented professional architects and architectural designers, with a depth of experience, from a range of different backgrounds and cultures. Creative Arch is a client-focused firm committed to providing excellence in service, culture and project outcomes. Some of Creative Arch’s most prominent projects include: Rothesay Bay House, North Shore, New Zealand Best Pacific Institute of Education, Auckland, New Zealand Sumar Holiday Home, Whangapoua, New Zealand Cook Holiday Home, Omaha, New Zealand Arkles Bay Residence, Whangaparaoa, New Zealand The following statistics helped Creative Arch achieve 8th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 18 7. Crosson Architects © Crosson Architects At Crosson Architects we are constantly striving to understand what is motivating the world around us. Some of Crosson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Hut on Sleds, Whangapoua, New Zealand Te Pae North Piha Surf Lifesaving Tower, Auckland, New Zealand Coromandel Bach, Coromandel, New Zealand Tutukaka House, Tutukaka, New Zealand St Heliers House, Saint Heliers, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Crosson Architects achieve 7th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 A+Awards Finalist 2 Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 6 6. Bossley Architects © Bossley Architects Bossley Architects is an architectural and interior design practice with the express purpose of providing intense input into a deliberately limited number of projects. The practice is based on the belief that innovative yet practical design is essential for the production of good buildings, and that the best buildings spring from an open and enthusiastic collaboration between architect, client and consultants. We have designed a wide range of projects including commercial, institutional and residential, and have amassed special expertise in the field of art galleries and museums, residential and the restaurant/entertainment sector. Whilst being very much design focused, the practice has an overriding interest in the pragmatics and feasibility of construction. Some of Bossley Architects’ most prominent projects include: Ngā Hau Māngere -Old Māngere Bridge Replacement, Auckland, New Zealand Arruba, Waiuku, New Zealand Brown Vujcich House Voyager NZ Maritime Museum Omana Luxury Villas, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Bossley Architects achieve 6th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 21 5. Smith Architects © Simon Devitt Photographer Smith Architects is an award-winning international architectural practice creating beautiful human spaces that are unique, innovative and sustainable through creativity, refinement and care. Phil and Tiffany Smith established the practice in 2007. We have spent more than two decades striving to understand what makes some buildings more attractive than others, in the anticipation that it can help us design better buildings. Some of Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include: Kakapo Creek Children’s Garden, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, New Zealand New Shoots Children’s Centre, Kerikeri, Kerikeri, New Zealand Gaia (Earth) Forest Preschool, Manurewa, Auckland, New Zealand Chrysalis Childcare, Auckland, New Zealand House of Wonder, Cambridge, Cambridge, New Zealand The following statistics helped Smith Architects achieve 5th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 1 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 23 4. Monk Mackenzie © Monk Mackenzie Monk Mackenzie is an architecture and design firm based in New Zealand. Monk Mackenzie’s design portfolio includes a variety of architectural projects, such as transport and infrastructure, hospitality and sport, residential, cultural and more. Some of Monk Mackenzie’s most prominent projects include: X HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand TURANGANUI BRIDGE, Gisborne, New Zealand VIVEKANANDA BRIDGE EDITION Canada Street Bridge, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Monk Mackenzie achieve 4th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 4 Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 17 3. Irving Smith Architects © Irving Smith Architects Irving Smith Jack (ISJ) has been developed as a niche architecture practice based in Nelson, but working in a variety of sensitive environments and contexts throughout New Zealand. ISJ demonstrates an ongoing commitment to innovative, sustainable and researched based design , backed up by national and international award and publication recognition, ongoing research with both the Universities of Canterbury and Auckland, and regular invitations to lecture on their work. Timber Awards include NZ’s highest residential, commercial and engineering timber designs. Key experience, ongoing research and work includes developing structural timber design solutions in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. Current projects include cultural, urban, civic and residential projects spread throughout New Zealand, and recently in the United States and France. Some of Irving Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include: SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand Mountain Range House, Brightwater, New Zealand Alexandra Tent House, Wellington, New Zealand Te Koputu a te Whanga a Toi : Whakatane Library & Exhibition Centre, Whakatane, New Zealand offSET Shed House, Gisborne, New Zealand The following statistics helped Irving Smith Architects achieve 3rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 1 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 13 2. Fearon Hay Architects © Fearon Hay Architects Fearon Hay is a design-led studio undertaking a broad range of projects in diverse environments, the firm is engaged in projects on sites around the world. Tim Hay and Jeff Fearon founded the practice in 1993 as a way to enable their combined involvement in the design and delivery of each project. Together, they lead an international team of experienced professionals. The studio approached every project with a commitment to design excellence, a thoughtful consideration of site and place, and an inventive sense of creativity. Fearon Hay enjoys responding to a range of briefs: Commercial projects for office and workplace, complex heritage environments, public work within the urban realm or wider landscape, private dwellings and detailed bespoke work for hospitality and interior environments. Some of Fearon Hay Architects’ most prominent projects include: Bishop Hill The Camp, Tawharanui Peninsula, New Zealand Matagouri, Queenstown, New Zealand Alpine Terrace House, Queenstown, New Zealand Island Retreat, Auckland, New Zealand Bishop Selwyn Chapel, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Fearon Hay Architects achieve 2nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 3 Featured Projects 8 Total Projects 17 1. RTA Studio © RTA Studio Richard Naish founded RTA Studio in 1999 after a successful career with top practices in London and Auckland. We are a practice that focuses on delivering exceptional design with a considered and personal service. Our work aims to make a lasting contribution to the urban and natural context by challenging, provoking and delighting. Our studio is constantly working within the realms of public, commercial and urban design as well as sensitive residential projects. We are committed to a sustainable built environment and are at the forefront developing carbon neutral buildings. RTA Studio has received more than 100 New Zealand and international awards, including Home of The Year, a World Architecture Festival category win and the New Zealand Architecture Medal. Some of RTA Studio’s most prominent projects include: SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand OBJECTSPACE, Auckland, New Zealand C3 House, New Zealand Freemans Bay School, Freemans Bay, Auckland, New Zealand ARROWTOWN HOUSE, Arrowtown, New Zealand Featured image: E-Type House by RTA Studio, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped RTA Studio achieve 1st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 6 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 16 Why Should I Trust Architizer’s Ranking? With more than 30,000 architecture firms and over 130,000 projects within its database, Architizer is proud to host the world’s largest online community of architects and building product manufacturers. Its celebrated A+Awards program is also the largest celebration of architecture and building products, with more than 400 jurors and hundreds of thousands of public votes helping to recognize the world’s best architecture each year. Architizer also powers firm directories for a number of AIA (American Institute of Architects) Chapters nationwide, including the official directory of architecture firms for AIA New York. An example of a project page on Architizer with Project Award Badges highlighted A Guide to Project Awards The blue “+” badge denotes that a project has won a prestigious A+Award as described above. Hovering over the badge reveals details of the award, including award category, year, and whether the project won the jury or popular choice award. The orange Project of the Day and yellow Featured Project badges are awarded by Architizer’s Editorial team, and are selected based on a number of factors. The following factors increase a project’s likelihood of being featured or awarded Project of the Day status: Project completed within the last 3 years A well written, concise project description of at least 3 paragraphs Architectural design with a high level of both functional and aesthetic value High quality, in focus photographs At least 8 photographs of both the interior and exterior of the building Inclusion of architectural drawings and renderings Inclusion of construction photographs There are 7 Projects of the Day each week and a further 31 Featured Projects. Each Project of the Day is published on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram Stories, while each Featured Project is published on Facebook. Each Project of the Day also features in Architizer’s Weekly Projects Newsletter and shared with 170,000 subscribers.     We’re constantly look for the world’s best architects to join our community. If you would like to understand more about this ranking list and learn how your firm can achieve a presence on it, please don’t hesitate to reach out to us at editorial@architizer.com. The post 30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand appeared first on Journal.

The name, the myth, the icon: Barbie is almost synonymous with pink, the specific hues of the time responding to cultural trends across the decades. The doll – created by Ruth Handler in 1959, and distributed and produced by Mattel – has reflected and also shaped decades of American culture. Bauhaus-inspired, Barbie and HEWI have collaborated to present the Barbie x HEWI sanitaryware collection, bathed in an approachable yet sophisticated shade of pink. With a focus on celebrating individuality the Barbie way, HEWI fosters a precedent of inclusive design for bathrooms at large, ushering in a new era where all are safe and welcome. HEWI continues to set new standards in bathroom and accessory design for almost one hundred years. Their iconic extruded door handle has extended to every facet of the bathroom, including a towel bar, shower seat, soap dish, and toilet roll holder, offering everything you might need if your bathroom needs a bit of brightness. A lovely shade of light pink accented with an approachable cream color allows the Barbie x HEWI collection to fit in with existing decor, palette incredibly important in a room made for washing and cleanliness. With a satisfying thickness sometimes absent from bathroom collections, each piece receives the signature HEWI finish, glossy and made to last even through the toughest bath times. Barbie has been an integral part of our culture for over 65 years, offering a new perspective about what professions the doll could take part in and the roles she could play. In more recent years, inclusion has been a priority for the brand, choosing a more natural silhouette and featuring a more accurate and diverse picture of who Barbie and her friends could be. Here, this energy extends to the restroom, where the iconic Barbie pink meets the bold, Bauhaus silhouette of HEWI designs. HEWI has been at the forefront of product design for over 90 years, challenging themselves and others to anticipate the needs of subsequent generations. With work in healthcare, public projects, hotels, and education, HEWI strives to continue to push the boundaries of materials technology, closing loops on their production processes with projects like the Re-seat collection, made out of offcuts from injection molding. To learn more about the Barbie x HEWI sanitaryware collection, please visit barbiexhewi.com.  Imagery courtesy of HEWI.