Sharing Cities A case for truly smart and sustainable cities Duncan McLaren Julian Agyeman @mclaren_erc @julian_agyeman Lecture given at Sustainability Science Centre, University of Copenhagen 14th December 2015 Sharing cities: an outline • Historic forms of sharing • The sharing economy of San Francisco • The sharing paradigm and flavors of sharing • Civic sharing in Seoul, ‘Sharing City’ • Inclusion in the public realm in Medellín • Diversity in Amsterdam • The counter-culture of Christiania, Copenhagen • The politics of the urban commons • Smart but stupid in Masdar • Principles and recommendations for Sharing Cities The scope of sharing • We share things (cars, tools), services (sites for meeting, sleeping), activities and experiences (political activity, leisure) • Which can be material or virtual - tangible or intangible • Enabling consumption (digital music), or production (community gardens) • Sharing can be simultaneous (public space) or sequential (recycling materials) – rivalrous (solo use excludes another e.g. car share) or non-rivalrous (open source software) • Distribution of shares: sharing in parts or sharing in turns • We share with other private individuals, in collective groups and as citizens The Rituals, Pleasures Together and Politics of Cooperation The evolution of a sharing species Mark Pagel, Wired for Culture: The Natural History of Human Coopera8on. London: Allen Lane, 2012. Peter Richerson and Robert Boyd, Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolu8on University of Chicago Press, 2005. MarCn Nowak with Roger Highfield, Supercooperators: Altruism, Evolu8on, and Why We Need Each Other to Succeed. Free Press, 2012 Samuel Bowles and Herbert GinCs, A Coopera8ve Species: Human Reciprocity and Its Evolu8on. Princeton University Press, 2013. Declining social capital and its impacts: Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000 SenneR, Richard. ToGether: The Rituals, Pleasures and Poli8cs of Coopera8on. London: Penguin, 2013. Wilkinson, Richard, and Kate PickeR. The Spirit Level: Why Equality Is BeKer for Everyone. London: Allen Lane, 2009 Harper Business, 2010 Cri8ques of the commercial sharinG economy (see for example): Morozov, Evgeny. “Don’t Believe the Hype, the ‘Sharing Economy’ Masks a Failing Economy.” The Guardian, September 28, 2014. Yglesias, Mahew. “There Is No ‘Sharing Economy,’” Slate, December 26, 2013. Coopera8ve models of sharinG: Orsi, Janelle, Yassi Eskandari-Qajar, Eve Weissman, Molly Hall, Ari Mann, and Mira Luna. Policies for Shareable Ci8es: A SharinG Economy Policy Primer for Urban Leaders. Oakland, CA: Shareable and the Sustainable Economies Law Center, 2013. Schor, Juliet. “Debang the Sharing Economy.” Great Transi8on Ini8a8ve. October 2014. “a new lens throuGh which to understand … urban sustainability” - Brent Toderian, former Director of City Planning, Vancouver. “a remarkably comprehensive overview of many dimensions of the sharinG movement and the sharinG economy. … Every mayor, city policy-maker, and ci8zen chanGe-maker should read this” - Janelle Orsi, SELC, San Francisco. “If you want to understand the possibili8es and challenGes of the sharinG paradiGm to transform the way ci8es are desiGned, read this book” - Rachel Botsman. Published by MIT Press December 2015 Understood as offering new ways to create and use collective commons of physical and virtual resources, spaces, infrastructures and services, the sharing paradigm makes it clear that sharing is much more than simply a novel way of allocating access to conventional goods and services A tale of two discourses: the sharing ‘economy’ vs the sharing paradigm Sharing ‘Economy’ Sharing ‘Paradigm’ Economic activity Social, cultural, political activity Economy underpins society Society underpins economy Environment as source of Environment as fundamental resources arena of evolution Autonomous individuals Interdependent and vulnerable people Transactional Relational Market-based ‘solutions’ Political and behavioural ‘solutions’ On Care Ethics, see Virginia Held, 2006. The Ethics of Care: personal, political, and global. OUP. Sharing(domain(( Concepts( Examples( Material(( Industrial+ecology+ Circular+economy,+recovery+and+ recycling,+scrapyards++ tangible) Production( Collaborative+ Fab8labs,+community+energy,+job8sharing,+ facility( production+ open8sourcing,+crowdfunding+ Product( Redistribution+ Flea+markets,+charity+shops,+Freecycle,+ markets++ swapping+and+gifting+platforms+ Service( Product+service+ Ride8sharing,+media+streaming,+fashion+ systems+ and+toy+rental,+libraries++ Experience(( Collaborative+ Errand+networks,+peer+to+peer+travel,+ lifestyles++ couchsurfing,+skillsharing++ Capability( Collective+ The+internet,+safe+streets,+participative+ commons+ politics,+SOLEs,+citizen’s+incomes++ +++++++Intangible* ! The Sharing Spectrum (Source: McLaren and Agyeman, 2015; capabilities concept after Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum) Seoul’s Sharing City project aims to “share lives among dispersed people, recover trust and relationships, and shape a warm city in terms of people’s heart.” Kim Tae Kyoon, Social Innovation Director, Seoul “Medellín constructed avant-Garde public buildinGs in areas that were the most run-down, provided house paint to ci8zens livinG in poor districts, and cleaned up and improved the streets – all in the belief that if you treat people with diGnity, they will value their surroundinGs and take pride in their communi8es.” Joseph SCglitz Interculturalism and contact theory: Gordon W. Allport, The Nature of Prejudice (Cambridge, MA: Addison- Wesley, 1954) Thomas Pegrew and Linda Tropp, “A meta-analyCc test of intergroup contact theory” Journal of Personality and Social PsycholoGy 90(5) 2006 Oliver Christ et al “Contextual effect of posiCve intergroup contact on outgroup prejudice.” PNAS, 111(11) 2014 Empathy: Krznaric, Roman. Empathy: A Handbook for Revolu8on. London: Random House, 2013. Rilin, Jeremy. The Empathic Civiliza8on: The Race to Global Consciousness in a World in Crisis. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2010. Piracy: Kester Brewin, Mu8ny! Why We Love Pirates and How They Can Save Us. London: Vaux / Kester Brewin, 2012. Community land-8tlinG: Jota Samper, “GranCng of Land Tenure in Medellin, Colombia’s Informal SeRlements: Is Legalizaon the Best Alternave in a Landscape of Violence?” Informal SeKlements Research, 30 January 2014. Available at hp://informalseRlements.blogspot.se/2011/01/v- behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html. Co-producon of water and seweraGe connecons: Salim Alimuddin, Arif Hasan, and Asiya Sadiq, “The Work of the Anjuman Samaji Behbood and the Larger Faisalabad Context, Pakistan.” IIED WorkinG Paper 7 on Poverty Reducon in Urban Areas. 2001. Available at hp://pubs.iied.org/9073IIED.html Squats should “be recoGnized and supported for what they are: vibrant social centers at the very heart of the ‘commons’, acvely includinG the excluded.” Miguel MarCnez, “Squang for JusCce, Bringing Life to the City.” ROARMAG, May 13, 2014. Christiania pic “The Danes are proud of [Chris8ania today] … Christiania pic Aeer all, these are people who built their own homes, who stood up to the Government and criminal elements for decades, who took in the poor and disadvantaGed, who were eco-friendly and racially diverse before anyone else, and who sent the world a stronG imaGe about the crea8vity and tolerance of Denmark. Tom Freston, “You Are Now Leaving the European Union.” Vanity Fair, 12 Sept 2013. MLP? On MLP see: Frank Geels,Processes and paerns in transiCons and system innovaons: refining the co-evoluConary mulC-level perspecCve, TechnoloGy Forecas8nG and Social ChanGe 72 (2007): 681– 696), Figure from: Rob Roggema, et al Incremental Change, transiCon or transformaon? OpCmising change pathways for climate adaptaon in spaal planning” Sustainability 4(10) (2012), 2525–2549. Three strategies for transformation Revolution Subversion Re-invention Challenge conventional Using its own tools to Designing alternative approaches and power redesign system rules systems in any spaces directly. Implies mass and relationships. left (relatively) mobilisation around a Requires uncomfortable untouched by the common cause. collaboration and conventional system. alliances. Difficult to mainstream. “Smash the system” “Flip the system” “Ignore the system” See also: Erik Olin Wright, EnvisaGinG Real Utopias. Verso, 2010. Three strategies for transformation RevolutionSharing can be a Subversionsubversive Re-invention, boRom-up - simultaneously counter-cultural and intercultural - reinvenCon of consumpCon as a collaborave, shared, idenCty- Challenge conventional Using its own tools to Designing alternative approaches and power redesign system rules systems in any spaces directly.redefining, process of co- Implies mass and relationships. left (relatively) mobilisation around a Requires uncomfortable untouched by the commonproducCon of services and cause. collaboration and conventional system. alliances. Difficult to mainstream. products supplying fundamental “Smashneeds the system” “Flip the system” “Ignore the system” See also: Erik Olin Wright, EnvisaGinG Real Utopias. Verso, 2010. On Occupy, anarchism and network poli8cs: David Graeber, The Democracy Project - A History. A Crisis. A Movement. Penguin, 2013. Manuel Castells, Networks of OutraGe and Hope. Polity Press, 2012. On values shis: Dan M. Kahan, “The Logic of Reciprocity: Trust, CollecCve AcCon, and Law” John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper