<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Zaha-Hadid on SAUDI VISION 2030 Intelligence Platform</title><link>https://vision2030.ai/tags/zaha-hadid/</link><description>Recent content in Zaha-Hadid on SAUDI VISION 2030 Intelligence Platform</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://vision2030.ai/tags/zaha-hadid/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Architects Who Stayed: BIG, Zaha Hadid, OMA, and the Moral Calculus of Building NEOM</title><link>https://vision2030.ai/analysis/architects-who-stayed/</link><pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://vision2030.ai/analysis/architects-who-stayed/</guid><description>&lt;p>Architecture is a profession that operates on commissions. The client provides the brief and the budget. The architect provides the vision and, implicitly, the legitimacy. A rendering by Zaha Hadid Architects transforms a construction project into a cultural event. A design by Bjarke Ingels Group transforms a developer&amp;rsquo;s ambition into a magazine cover. The exchange is understood: the architect provides aesthetic authority, and the client provides the cheque. The question of what happens beneath the rendering — who builds it, under what conditions, and at what human cost — is one that the profession has historically treated as outside its scope.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>