Helen Jarvis: Reimagining Urban Growth in the Desire Lines of Community-led Development. 14.06.2012
Oslo City Hall: June 14th 2012Reimagining urban growth in the desire lines g g g of community‐led development Dr Helen J D H l Jarvis i Reader in Social Geography
Outline of talk Outline of talkHow do we understand growth? g• Key concepts – Infrastructures of daily life y – Sustainable degrowth – Efficiencies of sharing – Participation and co‐creation• Metaphors p – Desire lines – Urban imaginations • Expressions/ examples• Concluding remarks
My approach My approach• Interdependent spheres of restructuring (housing, employment, gender relations); everyday dilemmas of work/life balance• Time‐space coordination (not only who does what, where, when, but non‐instrumental (e.g. as mutuality, stewardship)• Recent shift from absence of ‘balance’ to motivations and intentions of excluded residents to seek a ‘better future’ via ‘utopian method of thinking’‐ a journey of h d f hi ki ’ j f experimentation and yearning.
( Soft ) Infrastructures of Daily Life (‘Soft’) Infrastructures of Daily Life• I i i f Inspiration for an integrated approach; originally a Nordic i d h i i ll N di feminist housing and urban design project ‘New Everyday Life’ (Gullestad 1991).• The vision of a more harmonious, creative and just society in which children’s and women’s needs and the social reproduction of all people and natures are valued as central reproduction of all people and natures are valued as central motives for action (and policy). • Crucially, the infrastructure of daily life is the social fabric that lubricates collective responsibility and local networks of lubricates collective responsibility and local networks of reciprocity and exchange (diverse economies).• Progressive planning ‘manifestoes’ including EuroFEM (Booth and Gilroy 1999). d Gil 1999)• Developments in participatory and collaborative planning ( (Horrelli et al. 1998; Healey 1997; Jarvis 2009). ; y ; )
How do we understand urban growth? Two extremes• (i) (i) Orthodox ‘celebration’ (growth machine) h d ‘ l b i ’( h hi ) – Measured in terms of jobs and investment, global competitiveness and a culture and quality of life that attracts and retains skilled workers. – Coincides with hyper‐modern time‐space coordination and labour‐saving technologies that tend to stretch‐out and time‐shift multiple t d t t t h t d ti hift lti l commitments more energy intensively – N t li Naturalises marketised h k ti d household livelihood and h ld li lih d d ‘runaway’ consumption (Amin and Thrift 2005)
Opposing the ‘celebration’ of growth: sustainable de‐growth• (ii) (ii) negative, unintended consequences i i d d – Goal of sufficiency; standards of living can be maintained and improved through greater resource i t i d di d th h t efficiency. – An ‘ethic of care’ ‐ for social justice (addressing An ethic of care for social justice (addressing inequality within society and between generations) and ecological sustainability. g y – Distinguish between unplanned de‐growth (recession) and a voluntary, smooth and equitable transition to a regime of lower production and consumption.
Efficiencies of sharing Efficiencies of sharing• G Growth vs D th De‐growth binary too simple – more th bi t i l complex picture of competing interests – e.g. Norway, practical, home‐centred idea of egalitarian e.g. Norway, practical, home centred idea of egalitarian individualism combined with very high rate of one‐person households.• Assumed ‘economy of scale’ in ‘smart growth’ urban Assumed ‘economy of scale’ in ‘smart‐growth’ urban re‐development (energy savings) undermined by consumption/debt cultures of privacy and property. p / p y p p y• Sharing is socially and spatially constructed and influenced to a considerable extent by presence/absence of ownership; suggests that / b f hi t th t ‘unplanned’ autonomous public spaces (the street) help incubate vitality and resilience – via sharing. p y g
Urban imaginations• Addressing the loss of a sense of collective responsibility and shared endeavour p y• Consider the landscape of social interaction and collaboration – civil society, ‘soft’ infrastructure.• R lib i Recalibration evident in local efforts to establish id i l l ff bli h and promote distinctiveness of place, e.g. slow food, cittaslow (slow cities), post‐material social ( ) p movements of simple living (focus on ‘being and doing’ rather than ‘possessing’). – The Economics of Happiness, documentary by Helena The Economics of Happiness, documentary by Helena Norberg‐Hodge for ISEC. – Illich (1973: 12) ‘conviviality’ the opposite of global, p y y industrial productivity. The ‘tools’ of conviviality facilitate ‘autonomous and creative engagement among persons and between people and their environment’.
How might we re‐imagine an alternative pattern of growth? Desire lines.... Used as a metaphor for the hazards of pspeculative development; unmet desire to create homes that are nodes in a community fabric.in a community fabric
Participation and co‐creation Participation and co creation• Distinction to be made Distinction to be made between planning for people, whether designed people whether designed by experts or in consultation with end‐user, consultation with end user and planning with people; genuinely participatory, genuinely participatory• co‐creative, joint‐venture or community‐led i l d• The Great North Build• http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_d etailpage&v=QudbFaYulf8
Almere OAl Oosterwold, The ld ThNetherlandsa New Town entirely built on reclaimed land where sites are provided for the construction of individually designed homes
Other community‐led innovations Other community led innovations• Ithaca Eco‐village Hockerton Earth Sheltered (cohousing) USA Housing Project, UK low‐impact eco‐villages; Innovations in shared housing (older I ti i h d h i ( ld home‐owners sharing with younger tenant carers); Senior and inter‐generational Senior and inter generational cohousing; New forms of mutual home ownership.
Norddysson Mælkebøtten Midtdyssen Bjøreekloen Neighbouring gentrification Den Bla Karamel Nordområdet Psyak MælkevejenLoppebygningen Løvehuset Fabriksområdet SyddyssenPrærien Fredens Ark Tinghuset
Concluding remarks Concluding remarks• from whose perspective are ‘growth’, p p g , ‘competitiveness’ and ‘liveability’ understood?• Strong economies can be hostile environments Strong economies can be hostile environments for those in poor health, those caring for dependents, or managing on a low income. dependents, or managing on a low income.• Inequalities between households; a web of resources and multiple economies; Bourdieu s resources and multiple economies; Bourdieu’s ‘logic of the situation’.• compelling arguments for engaging in a more compelling arguments for engaging in a more imaginative review of how people might live and work differently in the future. work differently in the future