Download full-text PDF

Lancaster as a sharing city: an interdisciplinary exploration and thought experiment

Conference Paper (PDF Available)  · June 2015with102 Reads

Conference: Conference: First International Workshop on the Sharing Economy, At Utrecht
Serena Pollastri at Lancaster University
  • 4.77
  • Lancaster University
Rachel F. D. Cooper at Lancaster University
  • 28.85
  • Lancaster University
Christopher Boyko at Lancaster University
  • 17.67
  • Lancaster University
Nick Dunn at Lancaster University
  • 7.67
  • Lancaster University
Abstract
This paper presents an ongoing study that is being conducted jointly by Lancaster University, University of Birmingham, University of Southampton, and University College of London as part of the Liveable Cities programme. Liveable Cities is a five-year interdisciplinary research programme aimed at developing guidelines to implement radical solutions for low-carbon, resource-secure UK cities that prioritise societal wellbeing and aspirations. “Sharing City” is the first of a series of seven cross-disciplinary themes that bring together the research teams involved in Liveable Cities in localized “thought experiments” aimed at developing scenarios of desirable and provocative urban futures in the form of social conversations, policy recommendations, and prototypes. Although the term “Sharing Economy” has only recently grown in popularity, literature indicates sharing as an essential component of cities. The city itself is a complex product of shared creation and/or co-production. Sharing in cities was and is needed to maintain the environment, support the civic society, sustain the economy, and promote individual and community wellbeing. Despite the quality, safety, and accessibility of most essential infrastructures and services of our cities (e.g. energy and water networks, libraries, roads) depending on them being shared, we are experiencing increasing privatisation and commercialisation of many resources that were “public”. Moreover, particularly in wealthier societies, the crisis of urban commons might contribute to an increase in the social value and importance of owning goods and resources to fulfil everyday needs. We define Sharing Cities as cities where individualistic consumption of resources and ideologies are valued less than those that emphasise the collective benefit to citizens and other stakeholders. A Sharing City is more than simply a city in which models of Sharing Economy become mainstream. It is a city that needs to rethink its infrastructure, spaces, services, and governance. A number of questions need to be asked: • How can we design and engineer cities that maintain/improve/prioritise sharing? • What does a sharing city look like and how does it function? • What are the barriers to creating and maintaining such a sharing city? • How do sharing cities impact individual, community and planetary wellbeing? • Can sharing cities reduce carbon and other resource use while positively impacting wellbeing? • What gets shared in the sharing city? • Who shares (e.g., between groups, between cities)? • Is sharing equal for all parties involved? • How does sharing occur? While we can draw upon research that is being conducted in different areas of the Liveable Cities project to understand some of these issues, studies on cities are rarely complete without a contextualisation. We chose therefore to understand what would it mean for the city of Lancaster (one of the three Liveable Cities case studies) to become a Sharing City. We are also aiming to conduct a shorter comparative study for the city of Birmingham. Lancaster is a small city in the North-West of England, characterised by a rich historical and cultural heritage, its proximity to nature, and two universities. A large number of groups involved in formal and informal initiatives of sharing are active in the city. We decided to directly involve these groups early on in our research project, to learn from their expertise and day-to-day experience. To do so, we organised a one-day workshop for researchers and members of the local community involved in or with a strong interest in sharing. The aims of the workshop included mapping current initiatives of formal and informal sharing in Lancaster, discussing worst-case scenarios (worries, dangers and risks of sharing), and imagining a future city in which positive initiatives of sharing could be amplified, new forms of sharing could be created, and barriers could be destroyed. A summary report is forthcoming. One of the key-concepts of the day was the need for “building bridges”. The “Lancaster Map of Sharing” produced at the beginning of the workshop captured a rich landscape of initiatives, particularly in the areas of food and urban farming, ethical and fair trade, knowledge and skills exchange. However, there seems to be a need for better communication and understanding across the groups and with the rest of the population that is not directly involved (but might be interested). “Bridges” are also constituted by spaces and infrastructures. The ill-designed transport network in Lancaster, and the limited spaces that are available for shared use, constitute practical barriers to sharing. Finally, to design a sharing city, “bridges” between communities and the local government should be improved, by supporting models of participatory governance. However, the ultimate condition for sharing is trust. This leads to an additional research question: what are the conditions to be designed for a city that promotes trust?
Figures
LANCASTER AS A SHARING CITY
an interdisciplinary exploration
and thought experiment
Serena Pollastri, Rachel Cooper, Chris Boyko, Stephen Clune,
Claire Coulton, Nick Dunn
Imagination at Lancaster University
RESEARCH BACKGROUND
AND OBJECTIVES
_context
_context
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
phase 1
phase 2
Research and testing
Complementary themes
research challenges:
1_ Urban metabolism
2_ Wellbeing
3_ Low carbon energy
4_ Future visions
5_ Engineering strategies
sharing city
radical mobilities
ecosystem serviced city
re-zoned city
investing city
city of synthesised flows
delivering the liveable city
_Research questions
1) What could a sharing city look like and how does it
function?
a. What gets shared in the sharing city?
b. Who shares (e.g., between groups, between cities)?
c. How does sharing occur?
d. Why?
2) What needs to be done to develop a system in cities that
encourages sharing that improves wellbeing/energy use/
governance/resource sharing
a. Who does it?
b. What are the barriers to creating and maintaining such a sharing city?
3) Can sharing cities reduce carbon and other resource use
while positively impacting wellbeing?
a. How do sharing cities impact individual, community and planetary wellbeing?
b. Is sharing equal for all parties involved?
SHARING CITIES?
_What is a sharing city?
We dene Sharing Cities as cities where individualistic
consumption of resources and ideologies are valued less than
those that emphasise the collective benet to citizens and
other stakeholders.
A sharing city is a city that:
- treats its resources and opportunities as commons to be
shared equally
- enables creative bottom up initiatives of sharing to emerge,
and provides the infrastructure that is necessary to amplify
positive weak signals. Reconsiders the traditional production-
consumption paradigm in favour of collaborative models
- has an open and receptive approach to governance
_What is a sharing city?
Sharing city
=
City of sharing economy
_What is sharing?
sharing
gift giving
economic
exchange _ special occasion
_ the thoughts counts more
than what is given
_ implies reciprocity
_transfer of ownership
_ everyday life
_ impersonal
_ implies compensation
_ transfer of ownership
_ nonceremonial
_ care, love, social links.
_ reciprocity is not expected
_ shared ownership or
usufruct rights
Belk, Russell. 2010. “Sharing.” Journal of Consumer Research 36 (5): 715–34.
_Dimensions of sharing
sharing
gift giving
economic
exchange
Belk, Russell. 2010. “Sharing.” Journal of Consumer Research 36 (5): 715–34.
sharing in
e.g. My partner and I share
an allotment
e.g. Gardenshare
sharing out
_Dimensions of sharing
sharing
gift giving
economic
exchange
Belk, Russell. 2010. “Sharing.” Journal of Consumer Research 36 (5): 715–34.
sharing in
e.g. My partner and I share
an allotment
e.g. Gardenshare
e.g. City park, community
gardens
sharing out
commons
_Dimensions of sharing
sharing in
private ownership public good
sharing out commons
Sharing economy,
collaborative consumption,
peer-to-peer economy
_Dimensions of sharing
sharing in
private ownership public good
sharing out commons
Sharing economy,
collaborative consumption,
peer-to-peer economy
sharing city
HOW LIVEABLE CITIES
IS LOOKING AT THE MATTER
_Research lenses
sharing in sharing out commons
sharing city
urban
metabolism
(ows)
future
visions,
radical
engineering
governance
and nance
low-carbon
energy
wellbeing,
mobilities,
aspirations
_Research context
LANCASTER, UK
LANCASTER AS A SHARING CITY
WORKSHOP
LANCASTER AS A
SHARING CITY
WORKSHOP
Making things visible and tangible
Imagine future scenarios of sharing
connecting what happens now on a small,
disconnected scale, to ideas on what would
happen if these solutions were amplied, new
services and infrastructures were created, and
obstacles that prevent sharing were removed.
_Making sharing visible and tangible
sharing a
hillside*
Fair Trade
International
Fair Trade
Towns
International
Sharing
Knowledge
Academic
Project
Sharing ideas
(education and
academia)
Peer Education
Information
about planning
for the future.
Have worked with
others to devise a
portfolio and run
workshops. Also a
member of Transition Freegling
Reusing unwanted
items
Incredible
Edible
Lancaster community
gardens (all in public
space)
Garden
Share
Claver Hill
Community food
growing
project/farm.
We share 12
chickens with 7
households.
My day is Saturday.
Research on
Lancaster food
groups
Sharing
knowledge on
environmental
sustainability
Member of
ESTA
going to sell tea
and hand made
cups in local
community as well
as creating poetry
Building
community
Online system
that allows older
adult to teach
English to
non-native
speakers
To create shared
experiences by
developing an
Green
Lancaster
Sharing food and
space
Ethical Small
Trade
Association
(ESTA)
Friend of
the Storey
Garden
School
lifts car
sharing
Lancaster -
Glasson Dock
Lancaster
Arts Partners
Art City
Project
Lancaster
community
car-club
Morecambe
Library
shares its building
with young
people service
Library
- venue share
- information
support.
- local community
groups
- resources (books,
computer, DVD...)
- volunteers and
friends sharing
time
Park
Friends
group*
sharing
space
sharing
kn ow ledge
sharing
ideas sharing
things
sharing
Time sharing
experiences
sharing
skills
sharing
Food
sharing
mobility
sharing
go vernance
Categories (what is shared)
Examples:
Happens in one key space
Happens in a network of spaces
Part of a bigger network
informal
formal
Key to the diagram:
_Making sharing visible and tangible
LANCASTER
LIBRARY
MORECAMBE
LIBRARY
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
SHARING
CHICKENS
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
THE STOREYS
GARDEN
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
FAIRFIELD
COMMUNITY GARDENS
COMMUNITY
FARM
GROWING SPACE
HOME
GARDEN
HOME
GARDEN
HOME
GARDEN
HOME
GARDEN
Shared spaces open to the
public
Key to the map:
_Making sharing visible and tangible
Map of spaces of
sharing
open to
everybody
open to
members”
_Making sharing visible and tangible
Mapping current and potential
connections, and learnings.
_Imagine future scenarios of sharing
- Five tables. Each table has a
map of Lancaster, some material
(markers, play-doh, blocks..)
- We asked: what would you
Create / Amplify / Destroy
THEMES
AND ISSUES
HUBS AND
BRIDGES
Redesign
mobility
Bridge Lancaster-
Morecambe
New models of
governance
Rethink local
economy
Spaces for
sharing
Focus on
values
Time for
sharing
Communication
in and outside
the network
Knowledge
exchange
Food as a
catalyst
Redesi
g
n
mobilit
y
nd outsid
t
and
nd
the network
w
th
the
Spaces
sharin
Reth
econ
on
es
d
catalyst
cat
overnance
nc
v
ge
ge
ge
-
e
r
g
public space as
sharing platform
dedicated
sharing hubs
local version of“sharing
economy”?
spaces and networks to
enable knowledge
sharing
(car free) physical
infrastructure to support
sharing
non-physical
infrastructure to enable
sharing (communication
and participation)
community use of
underutilized resources
in schools
pedestrian Lancaster
knowledge exchange
between university, NGOs,
enterpreneurs, community
park and ride
amplify central role
of library
hitchiking points University/town
sharing food, sharing stories,
capture values
Lancaster University train station
amplify food economy
transport between Lancaster,
Morecambe,and villages
market as a
sharing platform
connect Lancaster/Morecambe for
Morecambe’s wellbeing
school kitchens for
community use
create time to activate volunteers
space in school to be used
as coop space
rethink work hours/wage to value
time spent in community
Corner stores as cultural hubs
create trust; prioritise openness,
transparency, emotions. Value
driven rather than task driven
communal eco-centre
(in place of Primark)
Communicate sharing
destroy Primark
(opening in Fall 2015)
Re-brand Lancaster as a
Sharing City
more spaces for people to get
together
network of community “notice
boards”
more public space
(parks/along river)
create ways to get people’s voice
heard
pedestrian spaces for
walking and doing
no City Council
the A6 through route
collaborative representation
(instead of city council)
the one way system
new governance: “power with”
rather than “power over”
severely reduce cars
manage sharing
safer bike access
_Lancaster as a sharing city
_Themes
THEMES
AND ISSUES
HUBS AND
BRIDGES
Redesign
mobility
Bridge Lancaster-
Morecambe
New models of
governance
Rethink local
economy
Spaces for
sharing
Focus on
values
Time for
sharing
Communication
in and outside
the network
Knowledge
exchange
Food as a
catalyst
Redesi
g
n
mobilit
y
nd outsid
t
and
nd
the network
w
th
the
Spaces
sharin
Reth
econ
on
es
d
catalyst
cat
overnance
nc
v
ge
ge
ge
-
e
r
g
public space as
sharing platform
dedicated
sharing hubs
local version of“sharing
economy”?
spaces and networks to
enable knowledge
sharing
(car free) physical
infrastructure to support
sharing
non-physical
infrastructure to enable
sharing (communication
and participation)
community use of
underutilized resources
in schools
pedestrian Lancaster
knowledge exchange
between university, NGOs,
enterpreneurs, community
park and ride
amplify central role
of library
hitchiking points University/town
sharing food, sharing stories,
capture values
Lancaster University train station
amplify food economy
transport between
Lancaster,
Morecambe,and vi
llages
market as a
sharing platform
connect Lanc
aster/Morecambe for
Morecambe’s wellbein
g
school kitchens for
community use
create time to acti
vate volunteers
space in school to be used
as coop space
rethink work hours/wage to value
time spent in community
Corner stores as cultur
al hubs
create trust; prioritise openness,
tr
ansparency, emotions. Value
driven r
ather than task driven
communal eco-centre
(in place of Primark)
Communic
ate sharing
destroy Primark
(opening in
Fall 2015)
Re-br
and Lancaster as a
Sharing City
more spaces for people to get
together
network of community “notice
boards”
more public space
(parks/along river)
create ways to get people’s voice
heard
pedestrian spaces for
walking and doing
no City Council
the A6 through route
collaborative representation
(instead of city council)
the one way system
new governance: “power with”
rather than “power over”
severely reduce cars
manage sharing
safer bike access
_Hubs and Bridges
THEMES
AND ISSUES
HUBS AND
BRIDGES
Redesign
mobility
Bridge Lancaster-
Morecambe
New models of
governance
Rethink local
economy
Spaces for
sharing
Focus on
values
Time for
sharing
Communication
in and outside
the network
Knowledge
exchange
Food as a
catalyst
Redesi
g
n
mobilit
y
nd outsid
t
and
nd
the network
w
th
the
Spaces
sharin
Reth
econ
on
es
d
catalyst
cat
overnance
nc
v
ge
ge
ge
-
e
r
g
public space as
sharing platform
dedicated
sharing hubs
local version of“sharing
economy”?
spaces and networks to
enable knowledge
sharing
(car free) physical
infrastructure to support
sharing
non-physical
infrastructure to enable
sharing (communication
and participation)
community use of
underutilized resources
in schools
pedestrian Lancaster
knowledge exchange
between university, NGOs,
enterpreneurs, community
park and ride
amplify central role
of library
hitchiking points University/town
sharing food, sharing stories,
capture values
Lancaster University train station
amplify food economy
transport between Lancaster,
Morecambe,and villages
market as a
sharing platform
connect Lancaster/Morecambe for
Morecambe’s wellbeing
school kitchens for
community use
create time to activate volunteers
space in school to be used
as coop space
rethink work hours/wage to value
time spent in community
Corner stores as cultural hubs
create trust; prioritise openness,
transparency, emotions. Value
driven rather than task driven
communal eco-centre
(in place of Primark)
Communicate sharing
destroy Primark
(opening in Fall 2015)
Re-brand Lancaster as a
Sharing City
more spaces for people to get
together
network of community “notice
boards”
more public space
(parks/along river)
create ways to get people’s voice
heard
pedestrian spaces for
walking and doing
no City Council
the A6 through route
collaborative representation
(instead of city council)
the one way system
new governance: “power with”
rather than “power over”
severely reduce cars
manage sharing
safer bike access
_Hubs (some ideas)
Public space as a sharing platform
Community use of underutilised spaces in
schools
_Hubs (some ideas)
Image: http://foodcycle.org.uk/
“what if school kitchen were
used by the community
outside school hours?”
Spaces and networks to enable
knowledge sharing
_Hubs and bridges (some ideas)
Car-free mobility infrastructure to
connect (necessary for sharing)
_Bridges (some ideas)
“rst of all, let’s create better
connections by getting rid of
trac.”
Non-physical infrastructure to enable
sharing, communication and participation
_Bridges (some ideas)
Image: www.ickr.com/ photos/91429570@N08/8519127455/
WHAT ARE WE DOING NOW
_Research and analysis
sharing in sharing out commons
sharing city
urban
metabolism
(ows)
future
visions,
radical
engineering
governance
and nance
low-carbon
energy
wellbeing,
mobilities,
aspirations
_Research and analysis
example: ENERGY
NATIONAL GRID
TESLA Home
battery
Producer to
consumer
Safe, resilient,
quality
not the grid
(dierent users,
dierent reasons)
P2P model
MODEL REASON
_Research and analysis
example: ENERGY
NATIONAL GRID
TESLA Home
battery
Producer to
consumer
Safe, resilient,
quality
not the grid
(dierent users,
dierent reasons)
P2P model
MODEL REASON
altruism necessity
anti-consumerism
resource efficiency
_Research and analysis
example: ENERGY
NATIONAL GRID
NATIONAL GRID
TESLA Home
battery
TESLA Home battery
Producer to
consumer
Safe, resilient,
quality
not the grid
(dierent users,
dierent reasons)
P2P model
MODEL
SCALES
REASON
centralised formal top down
decentralised informal bottom up
_Research and analysis
example: ENERGY
NATIONAL GRID
TESLA Home
battery
Producer to
consumer
Safe, resilient,
quality
not the grid
(dierent users,
dierent reasons)
P2P model
MODEL REASON
Implications for wellbeing, resources, resilience, governance?
_Conclusions (?)
THANK YOU º DANKJEWEL
Serena Pollastri
s.pollastri@lancaster.ac.uk
@sere_miru
our blog: shareableandliveable@wordpress.com
www.liveablecities.org.uk
@LivCityLancs
This research doesn't cite any other publications.
Project
Our vision is to transform the engineering of cities to deliver global and societal wellbeing within the context of low carbon living and resource security through developing realistic and radical …" [more]
Project
This research project aimed to offer a deeper understanding of how organizational cultures significantly affect the digital product design in the digital landscape by reviewing impact of organizati…" [more]
Project
Sustainable Regeneration - from Evidence-based Urban Futures to Implementation is a unique research effort that establishes and tests alternative future scenarios, providing insights into the poten…" [more]
Book
December 2016
    This little book tells you about research that we did as part of the Liveable Cities project, looking at sharing in cities. Through a series of conversations with researchers and workshops with citizens of Lancaster and Birmingham in 2015, we conclude that: • Cities are important hubs for sharing and they always have been • Sharing is more than just giving something to someone to use- there... [Show full abstract]
    Conference Paper
    June 2016
      Visualisations of future cities usually depict coherent scenarios that rarely express the complexity of urban life. Our research explores ways to articulate conflicts and diversities, rather than mitigate them, when reflecting on possible futures for urban life. We define Visual Conversations on Urban Futures as visualisations of future scenarios that utilise visual methods to generate,... [Show full abstract]
      Article
      July 2017 · Design Journal, The
        Design (and design research) have a rich history of developing ways of making possible futures visible and tangible through prototypes, models, scenarios, or visualisations. Less common are platforms that gather multiple perspectives in the same space about possible futures. Thinking about diverse, rather than alternative, futures is particularly relevant in the context of cities. This paper... [Show full abstract]
        Discover more