[Julia Lent]

Chris – I cover licensure issues on staff for ASLA. The short answer is that there is really no difference in usage between registered & licensed. Sometimes the term ‘certified’ has been used, too, but I don’t believe any are currently doing that. The following is adapted from a piece I wrote for LAND Online a few years back that goes into more info than you would ever want to know on this subject:

Landscape architects are regulated by a patchwork of 49 different state licensure laws that have been enacted and amended and upgraded for over 50 years. As a result, no two laws are identical and there are many variations to the way the profession is regulated in each state. The most important distinction is between a title act (only regulating who may use the title ‘landscape architect’ but not restricting the practice of the profession by any layperson) and the practice act (restricting both the practice of landscape architecture and the use of the title ‘landscape architect’ to those who meet the minimum eligibility requirements). The only remaining Title Act states are Maine, Massachusetts, Illinois & Wisconsin.

Historically, many professions have used the term registered, licensed or certified as a means to highlight their credentials and continue to do so today. Registered nurses and certified public accountants are two prominent examples of licensed professions that still retain their traditional titles in common usage.

For landscape architects and other design professionals, the interchangeable use of the three terms can be confusing. Add on the layers of state and local customs, and the patchwork of licensure gets even more complicated, especially for practitioners who work in multiple jurisdictions. The context of your situation will impact which terminology you choose.

Local practice: Both architects and landscape architects often refer to registration rather than licensure, even in states with a practice act. Even the Rs in CLARB and NCARB stand for Registration, and many state boards refer to registration rather than licensure. If you are already advocating changes for your law or regulations, you may want to suggest changes to use licensure terminology; however, if the state uses registration for other professions, it is probably best to stick with the status quo.

National events: When participating in conferences or other venues with landscape architects from around the country, be aware that the terms are used interchangeably. Use the term licensure if your home state has a practice act. This will reinforce the need for licensure and the impact that landscape architecture has on the public health, safety and welfare.

Legislators: It is important to reinforce licensure terminology with legislators and other stakeholders, but also to do so in the context of your state’s local customs. If advocating for the profession, licensure is appropriate, but if referring to the local regulatory board, of course you will continue to use the customary terminology. This is probably the most critical moment for understanding the difference between your local tradition and the three levels of professional regulation.

Landscape architects are not alone in the complex, contradictory world of professional licensing. Many others grapple with the same concerns in their practice. It is important for landscape architects to understand not only what the law does – licensing (practice act) or certification (title act) – but also the terminology used in their state in order to appropriately represent their professional credentials.

[Author]

Posts