This website works best with JavaScript enabled.

The Central Council

The Central Council
Previous Council Meeting Hosts
Council Secretariat
Prior Meetings


Overall authority for the control and management of the APEC Architect framework rests with its Central Council. Typically the Central Council meets every two years. It's members are representatives of the Monitoring Committees established in the participating economies.


The Central Council acts as the joint governing body for the APEC Architect framework and is composed of at least one representative from the Monitoring Committee of each  participating economy. There is no limit to the number of members appointed to the Council by Monitoring Committees but each authorised economy is entitled to only one vote.

Economies that have not yet received authorisation to maintain a section of the APEC Architect Register may appoint representatives to attend Central Council meetings as non-voting observers.


Duties of the Central Council

The Central Council has ultimate responsibility for the operation of each aspect of the APEC Architect framework. Its duties include the following:

Maintenance of the APEC Architect Register:

  • Determine standards and assessment procedures for admission, renewal and termination of the registration of an APEC Architect;
  • Oversee and coordinate all sections of the Register operated by independent Monitoring Committees,
  • Maintain the APEC Architect website;
  • Establish and apply governance systems and quality assurance strategies to review and maintain uniformity and compliance with agreed criteria.

Establishment of Monitoring Committees:

  • Determine policy concerning the composition, authorisation and responsibilities of Monitoring Committees;
  • Assess applications for authorisation of Monitoring Committees to operate a section of the APEC Architect Register, and to hear appeals;
  • Conduct reviews of registration systems and standards in authorised participating economies to ensure continued compliance;

Oversight of the Reciprocal Recognition Framework

  • Review the commitment of participating economies to the nominated categories of registration / certification requirements that they are prepared to offer APEC Architects from other economies;
  • Ensure that the reciprocal commitments recorded on websites are accurate and current.

Administration of the APEC Architect Project

  • Make provision for a Secretariat to administer the business of Council, maintain records and coordinate with Monitoring Committees;
  • Act as a communications centre to provide information, documentation and advice on all aspects of the project.

Council Proceeding

Council Meetings: The Central Council meets at least every two years, at a date and venue determined by the members, to review its procedures and criteria, consider applications for authorisation of Monitoring Committees, receive reports from participating economies, and deal with matters arising. Participating economies host the meetings on an rotating basis.

Membership: Monitoring Committee select their representatives to Central Council meetings, within the guidelines established by the Central Council.

Meeting Chair: The Central Council Meeting Chair is normally appointed by the Monitoring Committee acting as host, although this may be varied as required.

Meeting Agenda: Draft Central Council agendas are prepared by the Secretariat and circulated for comment to Central Council members, revised and re-circulated for final adoption by consensus at the start of Central Council meetings.

Meeting Quorum: The Central Council meeting quorum is two thirds of the Central Council Monitoring Committee membership.

Attendance: Monitoring Committees whose representatives fail to attend three consecutive meetings will be deemed to have withdrawn from the APEC Architect framework and may need to reapply for activation of their authorisation should they wish to continue as participants.

Decision Making: Central Council decisions in connection with changes to APEC Architect criteria and registration policy, and the authorisation or conditional suspension of Monitoring Committees require the two-third support of Central Council Monitoring Committees. Council decisions on other matters are arrived at by the consensus of members present. A Monitoring Committee must be represented in order to vote. All decisions requiring voting must be notified in advance of the meeting for precirculation with the agenda.

Meeting Protocols

  1. APEC is a grouping of economies and not countries. As such, economies participating in the APEC Architect project shall be referred to as “participating economies”.
  2. Participating economies attending the 5th Central Council Meeting are each assigned up to three front row seats, and only attendees occupying those seats may speak.
  3. All contributions are entirely voluntary.
  4. The business of the Central Council Meeting shall be conducted in English.
  5. Attendees wishing to speak shall indicate their wish to speak by raising their economy’s name plate.
  6. The Chair of the meeting shall recognize each attendee’s desire to speak by acknowledging his or her economy (i.e. not the attendee’s name).
  7. In general, the leader of each economy’s delegation speaks, though he/she may ask another member of his/her economy’s delegation to speak.
  8. All contributions shall be to the Chair.
  9. In general decisions shall be by consensus, but if a vote is required a simple majority will suffice for a resolution to be adopted.

Council Meeting Hosts

Central Council Meetings

1ST May 31 - June 1 2005 Mita Kaigisho, Tokyo, Japan JAPAN click here
2ND May 23 - 24 2006 Colegio de Arquitectos
Mexico City, Republic of Mexico
MEXICO  click here
3RD August 7 - 8 2008 Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue
Simon Fraser University
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 
CANADA  click here
4TH October 10 - 11 2010 SMX Convention Center, Pasay City, Philippines PHILIPPINES click here 
5TH October 4 - 5 2012 Wellington, New Zealand NEW ZEALAND  
6TH October 6 - 7 2014 Vancouver, Canada CANADA  
7TH October 10 - 11 2016 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia MALAYSIA  


Council Secretariat

The administration of the APEC Architect Project is shared by participating economies by the provision of a rotating secretariat, typically being provided by each economy for two years.

The APEC Architect Secretariat is responsible for:

  • Organising APEC Architect Project Central Council meetings
  • The management of Central Council records
  • The APEC Architect website
  • The Central Council's finances
  • The appointment of Council members
  • The authorisation of Monitoring Committees
  • Quality assurance provisions
  • Acting as a centre of information for all APEC Architect matters.

Republic of the Philippines is providing the Council Secretariat for 2019-2020 and can be contacted at:

APEC Architect Project Secretariat


Telephone Nos. +632

Email Address:

SECRETARIAT SCHEDULE (As approved during the Fifth Central Council Meeting)

2001 Australia Brisbane, Australia
2002 Australia Sydney, Australia
2002 Australia Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2004 Australia Chinese Taipei
2004 Australia Honolulu, USA
2005 Chinese Taipei Tokyo, Japan
2006 Chinese Taipei Mexico City, Mexico
2007-2008 Mexico Vancouver, Canada
2009-2010 The Philippines Metro Manila, Philippines
2011-2012 New Zealand Wellington, New Zealand
2013-2014 Canada Vancouver, Canada
2015-2016 Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2017-2018 People’s Republic of China People’s Republic of China
2019-2020 The Philippines Metro Manila, Philippines
2021-2022 Thailand Thailand
2023-2024 The United States of America The United States of America
2025-2026 Korea Korea
2027-2028 Japan Japan
2029-2030 Hong Kong China Hong Kong China
2031-2032 Chinese Taipei Chinese Taipei
2033-2034 Australia Australia


Note that Central Council Meetings shall be organised and hosted by the economies providing the secretariat in the second year of their time as the secretariat, unless arrangements have been made otherwise.

Council Secretariat 2010

4th CENTRAL COUNCIL MEETING Through the Eyes of the Central Council Secretariat : A REPORT


This is a documentation of the different activities surrounding the 4th APEC Architect Central Council Meeting from the point of view of its secretariat. The main activities are arranged sequentially, with their corresponding recommendations indicated in a boxed text. The objective of including the recommendations with this documentation is to enable the next secretariat to have a checklist of items that can be used in preparation for the meeting.

Note that the proceedings held in Manila, Philippines has a unique scenario of having back-to-back APEC events : the 1st International Conference of Architects (ICA) held on Oct. 8-9, and the 4th APEC Architect Central Council Meeting held on Oct. 10-11, 2010.

The events and recommendations documented here, therefore, pertain to this specific situation, an option which may be adopted by the next host economy.

The Central Council Meeting

The 4th APEC Architect Central Council Meeting was held in October 10-11, 2010 in the Philippines. The Secretary General (SG), Ar. Prosperidad C. Luis, assembled her support team to do various works related to the event. The CCS is composed of 3 Filipino architects, 1 Filipino graduate architect and a graduating architecture student from the University of Valladolid, Spain. A fourth member, a Filipino architect from the International Conference of Architects Organizing Committee (ICA OrCom), was also included in the CCS.

Recommendation Item 1: The Secretary General should assemble a support team to take care of tasks on hand, with the members each having different competencies, strengths and skills. 

A. Before the Central Council Meeting

  1. Prior to the actual meeting dates, the APEC Architect Central Council Secretariat (CCS) was given a briefing by the SG. The background of the APEC Architect Project, including the previous Central Council Meetings were presented and discussed. The terms and their definitions, and protocol were also explained to the group.
  2. The SG also set up a meeting with the CCS and some members of the ICA OrCom, composed of architects of the UAP Cavite Chapter. During the meeting, the following were shown / discussed :
    a. respective roles, functions and duties * primary to this is the documentation of the proceedings of the meeting
    b. interface of the two groups with each other
    c. outputs from previous Central Council Meetings to show
    expected outputs for this event
    d. photos taken during past meetings
    e. actual room where the meeting would take place

Recommendation Item 2:

2.a. The CCS should study the Meeting Summaries of the previous Central Council Meetings and other documents relevant to the event.
2.b. The CCS should familiarize themselves with the past delegates of the different economies. Protocol and other international observances should be studied in preparation for the activities.
2.c. The CCS should set in place redundant means of documentation : through manual documentation (note-taking), electronic recording, and tape recording. The mechanics of which should be in place prior to the event.
2.d. The CCS, along with the OrCom, should come up with a list of supplies and other materials that will be needed for the event. Items such as cassette tapes, batteries and other consumables should be procured and made available during the meeting proper.
2.e. The CCS should obtain a plan of the meeting room and provide a layout of the furniture and other equipment, including the location/positions of the different personalities participating in the event.
2.f. On the eve of Day 1, the CCS should make an ocular inspection of the meeting room, checking to see if the layout was followed. Familiarization with the recording system, monitors, and other equipment should also be done at this time. This includes coordination with the physical arrangement team, technicians, photographer and other support staff.

B. During the Central Council Meeting

1. The CCS, along with the OrCom members manning the Registration Table, facilitated the arrival of the delegates. The Chairs of the Registration Agencies of Australia, New Zealand and Singapore, along with the Convenor, members of the Philippine Monitoring Committee, and the Central Council Meeting Officers were ushered into a separate room, while the delegates of the participating economies were ushered into the meeting room.
2. A Pre-Meeting Event, the Signing of the Tri-Lateral Cross Border Registration Agreement (between Australia, New Zealand and Singapore) took place in the morning of Day 1. The CCS facilitated the speeches of the SG, the participating economies, the actual signing of the documents and the photo-documentation of the event.

Recommendation Item 3 :
3.a. For certain special events, scripts should be written which will provide the sequence of the proceedings. The CCS should familiarize themselves with the script vis-à-vis a layout of the meeting room showing the detailed seating arrangement of the different participants of the special event.
3.b. Upon the arrival of the participants of the special event, the CCS should brief them on their roles and on the sequence of events. Details such as sequence of entrance to the room, speaking and seating arrangements should be given to them. 

3.c. During the actual special event, the CCS should position themselves strategically to be able to assist the participants by ushering them into their respective roles. 

3. During the meeting proper, the CCS documented the proceedings. The CCS also provided assistance to the delegates on other matters such as :
a. uploading presentations by economies who wish to discuss related matters to the central council
b. encoding drafts and finalizing letters made by economies
c. other tasks to ensure the smooth flow of the meeting proper 

Recommendation Item 4 :
The CCS, in coordination with the OrCom, should establish a method by which activities such as reproduction of requested handouts, copying of presentations, etc., may be made outside the meeting room in a nearby “war” room. 

4. Discussions during the meeting were done in an orderly manner, with the Chair calling on the economies that gestured their request to have the floor. 

Recommendation Item 5 :
The CCS should adapt to the conditions of the meeting by providing assistance to the Chair in the event that the Chair cannot visually determine the sequence by which economies gave their gestures to request to speak. 

C. After the Central Council Meeting
1. The CCS made transcriptions of the meeting minutes, using the different means of documentation. The CCS made consultations with each other using their respective notes as basis for discussions.
2. The CCS made a draft of Summary Conclusions for Day 1 and 2 of the Central Council Meeting. With the SG, they discussed the possible format of the document and how this will be disseminated to the member economies for their comments and eventual approval. 

Recommendation Item 6 :
6.a. The SG and the CCS should have a de-briefing meeting to discuss the activities that remain to be done, including the expected outputs and target deadlines.
6.b. Under the supervision of the SG, the CCS should prepare the drafts of the outputs and revise accordingly per comments of the SG.
6.c. Taking turns, the SG and the members of the CCS should share their individual experiences of the event, providing comments and insights to enable everyone to make the most out of the enriching event. 


The 4th APEC Architect Project Central Council Secretariat is composed of the following members :
• Elda Shina S. Samoza, uap (Diliman Chapter) Lead Person, Central Council Secretariat (Associate & Deputy Operations Manager, LUIS and Associates)
• Dana Angela M. Bantigue, uap (Tandang Sora Chapter) Documentation, Central Council Secretariat (Project Coordinator, LUIS and Associates)
• Mariel M. Caguingin, uap (Tandang Sora Chapter) Documentation & IT Lead, Central Council Secretariat (Project Coordinator, LUIS and Associates)
• Carlo B. Gonzales Technical Support & Transcriber, Central Council Secretariat (Graduate Architect, LUIS and Associates)
• Ruben J. Aybar Technical Support & Liaison for Delegates, Central Council Secretariat (Graduating Student; Technical Staff, LUIS and Associates)
• Daisy L.P. Palattao, uap (Cavite Chapter) Organizing Committee Secretariat & Liaison, Central Council Secretariat 

Council Secretariat 2014

The projects’ participating economies provide the project with secretariat services on rotation. During 2013 and 2014 that duty has been met by Canada.

During the period the secretariat has focused on a number of tasks:

1. Providing administrative services including the recouping of outstanding annual fees,
2. Raising awareness of the project and providing information to architects who submitted inquiries via the website, and
3. Organizing the Sixth Central Council Meeting.

These tasks have been completed by Michael Ernest, Executive Director and Vicki Charman, Registration Coordinator at the Architectural Institute of British Columbia (AIBC) alongside their normal duties at their normal place of work.

Administrative Services

During the period 2013 – 2014, the Canadian secretariat:

  • Requested and collated annual reports,
  • Issued invoices to and received fees from all fourteen participating economies,
  • Were successful in recouping outstanding annual fees from the period 2011 – 2012,
  • Ensured that the website was kept ‘live’, and
  • Completed all other administrative and financial tasks as necessary.

Raising Awareness of the Project

By creating a generic project email address and adding it to the website, queries about the project were received from architects worldwide, these were responded to in an informative and timely manner. A lot of work was also completed by the secretariat and the Canadian Monitoring Committee to raise awareness of the project in its own country by making efforts to update all jurisdictions websites and making presentations at national meetings.

The Sixth Central Council Meeting

The Sixth Central Council Meeting held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada has been organized by the AIBC staff who have completed the work without sponsorship or external funding.

In September 2013, invoices were issued to all fourteen participating economies for both the 2013 and 2014 annual fee as per the funding formulae overleaf.



APEC is a cooperative association between 21 regional economies, founded to promote economic and technical cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. APEC builds on WTO General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS) principles for the progressive liberalisation of trade in services through the reduction of regulatory restrictions, leading to reciprocal agreements between member economies where appropriate.

The APEC Architect project is a direct response to these commitments. It is an initiative of the Human Resources Development Working Group (HRDWG), an APEC organisation concerned with the development of human resources within the region by enhancing opportunities for the transfer of knowledge and skills between participating economies. Most restrictions to trade in services apply to the establishment of a commercial presence and the presence of natural persons in a host nation, the usual methods of service provision employed by architects. The project originated from a proposal made by Australia in 2000 to develop a mechanism to achieve HRDWG goals within the architectural profession through application of the Group’s strategic priority of facilitating mobility of qualified persons through the mutual recognition of their skills and qualifications.

HRDWG objectives would be implemented through the establishment of a Register of APEC Architects who had satisfied criteria derived from common elements of professional recognition in participating economies, and who had a proven record of experience as registered/licensed practitioners. Registration as an APEC Architect would provide a mutual basis for exemption from some or all of the requirements for registration/licensure in host economies and create an incentive for the development of bilateral or multilateral recognition agreements between regulatory authorities in participating economies. The Australian Government would have oversight of the development phase of the project.

Eleven economies took part in the inaugural APEC Architect project meeting in Brisbane to consider the viability of this concept. Delegates reached agreement on the proposal to establish a Register of APEC Architects who had satisfied agreed criteria in their architectural education, training and accreditation, and had completed a period of professional experience in defined categories. A Steering Committee was formed to develop an organisational process to accomplish this goal. 

Inaugural Meeting - September 2001

Eleven economies took part in the inaugural APEC Architect project meeting in Brisbane to consider the viability of this concept. Delegates reached agreement on the proposal to establish a Register of APEC Architects who had satisfied agreed criteria in their architectural education, training and accreditation, and had completed a period of professional experience in defined categories. A Steering Committee was formed to develop an organisational process to accomplish this goal. 

2nd Steering Committee Meeting - December 2002

Malaysia hosted the second Steering Committee meeting in Kuala Lumpur. Decision was reached on the professional experience requirement and the remainder of the meeting focussed on development of an administrative structure for implementation of the project and management of the APEC Architect Register. The Committee adopted an organisational framework, modelled on the system developed by the APEC Engineer project, whereby a central council composed of representatives of participating economies has overall responsibility for management of the APEC Architect framework. The Central Council in turn authorises each economy to maintain a section of the APEC Architect Register. 

3rd Steering Committee Meeting - February 2004

Chinese Taipei hosted the third Steering Committee meeting. Originally scheduled for September 2003, the SARS epidemic threatening the region created an unexpected delay and the meeting was deferred for five months. However, surveys were conducted and negotiations continued in the interim period. The main purpose of the meeting was to determine Council rules of conduct and a process for the formation of sections of the APEC Architect Register by participating economies. The meeting concluded with the commitment of all delegations to establish a section of the APEC Architect Register and an undertaking by each economy to form a Provisional Monitoring Committee for this purpose. Delegates agreed to constitute a Provisional Council at the following meeting. 

4th Steering Committee Meeting / 1st Provisional Council Meeting – Sept. 2004

The fourth Steering Committee/first Provisional Council meeting was hosted by the USA in Honolulu. Twelve of the fifteen economies attending the meeting had formed Provisional Monitoring Committees in readiness for membership of the Provisional Council when it was constituted later in the meeting. The primary responsibility of the Steering Committee at its final meeting was to resolve all outstanding procedural matters necessary for authorisation of Monitoring Committees and constitution of the Central Council, and to agree on the process to be adopted for implementation of the APEC Architect Register.

An APEC Architect Operations Manual, incorporating the principles and procedures developed by the Steering Committee over the course of previous meetings was adopted for endorsement by the Central Council as the base reference document for the APEC Architect framework. The final duty of the Steering Committee was to receive the nominations of representatives of the newly formed Provisional Monitoring Committees to membership of the Provisional Council. The Provisional Council was constituted accordingly and assumed responsibility for all matters connected with the APEC Architect Register. The meeting ended with consensus agreement that future action must focus on completion of preparations for a successful launch of the APEC Architect Register and on promoting its benefits to architects so that it would be well subscribed and, in consequence, effective. Longer-term considerations embraced the possible negotiation of reciprocal agreements between participating economies for the recognition of architects.

This meeting concluded Australia’s undertaking to HRDWG to develop the project, and administrative responsibility for the next phase of its implementation has been passed to Chinese Taipei, which will act as Secretariat for the Central Council in its first term in office.