Abstract:

Free movement of people, goods and services is a general value that lays in foundations of the European Union (EU). Concerning education, it is implemented in the concept of European Educational Area and the strategic documents supporting it. The opportunity provided for every citizen in EU to study in every member state and in the states with special agreements has made a new step towards the internationalization of higher education in Europe and has raised the demand for rethinking the syllabi, mutual recognition of credits, and creating new international degree programmes.

Architecture and urban planning as regulated professions across EU are subject of national regulations that range from no national restrictions to very strict national rules in the different member-states. The regulations encompass professional education and rules for receiving professional degree, requirements for access to professional practice, for providing professional services at a given standard. Although the EU legislation has set the general framework for movement of professionals and services, there still exist barriers arising from the national legislation and set by the national rules for recognition of professional qualifications.

The professions of architects and urban planners in Europe have their strong national roots and their history in the last 100 years has influenced contemporary international schools and had serious impact on the trends of cohesion within the field of education. Although it is now difficult to speak about a specific national school, some barriers to free educational movement still exist. Many of these barriers become evident during Erasmus+ exchanges: ECTS and subject recognition, difference in grading scales, and difference in requirements concerning students’ work on study projects.

The paper presents a thorough study of EU legislation and regulations regarding the regulated professions of architect and urban planner through the lens of Bulgarian architecture and planning education and professional practice. A comparison with the national requirements in European states is provided and the gaps in the regulations for mutual recognition of professional degrees and professional qualifications of architects and urban planners are outlined. It also presents the current state of the mobility within the two professional communities in EU and claims for searching better balance between the contradicting and coexisting freedom of movement and professional recognition, internationalization and national regulations, global networks and local socio-spatial peculiarities.

Keywords:

Regulated profession, student mobility, professional mobility, freedom of movement, services in Europe, internationalization, regulations.