The document discusses the distinctions between smart cities and sharing cities, particularly focusing on Berlin's evolution toward becoming a sharing city. It highlights the collaborative and participatory nature of sharing cities as opposed to the more technocratic and top-down approach of smart cities, emphasizing the importance of citizen engagement and community building. Additionally, it presents potential analysis and recommendations for fostering a sharing economy in urban environments, underlining the need for a cultural shift and collaborative efforts among various stakeholders.

1. Sharing City (Berlin)
Impulse discourse 10 min
Thomas Dönnebrink
OuiShare Connector Germany
Freelancer Collaborative Economy
@TDoennebrink thomas@ouishare.net
21./22. June 2016 UBA (Federal Environment Agendy) Berlin,
Bismarckplatz 1, Raum 1134
In the context of the waste avoidance talks:
waste avoidance through new usage forms

2. Smart City / Definition
Quelle: http://www.4sustainability.de/fileadmin/redakteur/Publikationen/Loew-Rohde_Wiener-Smart_City-Definition_Betrachtungen-zur-Verwendung2015.pdf

3. Sharing City
I consider it very important to highlight the gaps between the Sharing City and the Smart City.
A first definition attempt for the Smart City was done 2011 in Vienna. Since then it was quoted and
borrowed repeatedly in presentations and subject books or further developed in neighbouring
Switzerland and Germany.
Here the beginning of the DIN /DKE definition of 2014 (translation)
„Smart City referes to a settlement area in which sustainable products, services, technology, processes
and infrastructure is applied systemically (ecological, social and economic) as a rule be backed-up by
highly integrated and interconnected information and communication technologies.“

4. Smart City Berlin
Quelle: http://www.berlin-partner.de/standort-berlin/smart-city-berlin/
Actors/Driver:
Public – Private Partnership: esp. large Corporations/Organisations
Approach/Philosopy/World view:
top – down, technocratic, technological, IOT, economic, paternalistic
Citizen:
passive – dependent – monitored/surveilled - consumeristic

5. Let‘s have a closer look at the Smart City approach of Berlin.
Here a few statements by one of the main driver in the city: berlin-partner: (translated)
„There is a clear political confession for Berlin as a smart city“
„On April 2015 the Berlin Senate has decided Smart-City-Strategy Berlin.“
Build out of the international competitiveness of the metropol region Berlin-Brandenburg, the increase
of the resource efficiency and climate neutrality until the year 2050.“
Or equally on the same internetsite:
„the network Smart City Berlin is a working group with more than 100 enterprises, science and
research entities initiated by the Berlin Partner for economy and technology ltd....“
Revealing also the cover ot the Smart City edition of the Berlin Partner journal/brochure.
Visible on the coverpage: city skyline, curve shapes, cloud, app & tech icons, accompagnied by the
following teaser: Industry 4.0, to take a look at the fourth revolution with GE. – Cisco, the goals of the
IT-giant at the site of Berlin – Greentech Award reward green innovations – and „An interview with the
chairman of DB Station & Service“
That pictures the actors/driver behind the Smart City Initiatives, their approach/philosophy/world
view and the role they contribute to the citizens as follows:
Actors/Driver:
Public – Private Partnership: esp. Large corporations/organisations
Approach/Philosopy/World view:
top – down, technocratic, technological, IOT, economic, paternalistic
Citizen:
passive – dependent – monitored/surveilled - consumeristic

6. Sharing City / Definition
Sharing City Berlin
Actors/Driver:
Public – Civic Partnership (multistakeholder)
Approach/Philosopy/World view:
bottom – up, collaborative, (techno-social), participatory
Citizens:
(pro)active – contributive – responsible - inclusive

7. In reference to Sharing City. Looking for Sharing City in Wikipedia is futile.
No entry is found neither in German nor in English.
Therefore we borrow the definition of Amsterdam, the first city in Europe that officially declared
themself a Sharing City.:
„Amsterdam Sharing City recognizes the sharing economy as a key driver of sustainable and
economically resilient city rich in social capital and acknowledges the need to consider sharing
economy principles and incorporate them in the process of recreating the political, economic and
social landscape.“
From this definition and my own understanding I derive the following characteristics for a Sharing City,
which distinguishes it partly quite clearly from Smart Cities:
Actors/Driver:
Public – Civic Partnership (multistakeholder)
Approach/Philosopy/World view:
bottom – up, collaborative, (techno-social), participatory
Citizens:
(pro)active – contributive – responsible – inclusive
Looking at the ambassadors forming part of the Amsterdam Sharing City, one find among the actors
also Amsterdam Smart City. In this case – and IMHO it should be the way – Smart City is a component
of a Sharing City.

8. Sharing City vs. Smart City
„A revolution doesn‘t happen
when society adopts new tools, it happens
When society adopts new behaviour“
Clay Shirky
„It is the need to design a system
that puts all that technology truly at the service of the inhabitants
— and not the other way around.“
Saskia Sassen

9. And in order to emphasize once more the important distinction of the Sharing City vs. The Smart City –
also in view of the question one should start out with: WHY one does or wants to do something and
than think about HOW one wants to or should do it before dealing with the WHAT.
Here two quotes:
1. Clay Shirky, author, consultant and and teacher on the social and economic effects of Internet
technologies: „A revolution doesn’t happen when society adopts new tools. It happens when society
adopts new behaviors“
2. Or similar, Saskia Sassen, sociologist with focus on globalisation and international human migration.:
“It is the need to design a system that puts all that technology truly at the service of the inhabitants—
and not the other way around.”

10. Potential analysis of the Sharing &
Collaborative Economy in Berlin
Chapters
I: Contextualisation of the Share Economy
II: Capture of the Berlin Actors/ Mapping
III: Results of the Online Questionnaire
IV: International Sharing Cities
V: Guidance / Recommendations
VI: Résumé

11. End of 2014 there was some interest coming out of the Senate Department for Economics, Technology
and Research to investigate the potential of the sharing and collaborative economy in the city.
As a four-member-team we were commission to write a small potential analysis.
We gave the final 30+ page paper the title:
From the divided to the sharing city. Berlin on its way to a Sharing City.
I was asked to also present the study here. I will just give a short overview.
If interested you can find the potential analysis – a bit hidden and just recently made available after a
political inquiry and having been stored away in a drawer for 15 months – here:
berlin.de/sen/wirtschaft or Sharingberlin.de/potenzialanalyse

12. Potential Analysis
I: Contextualisation of the Share Economy

13. Chapter I
Beginning with a contextualization and the definition of the Sharing & Collaborative Economy.
(Here our division: Collaborative ... 1) ... Consumption 2) ... Production 3) ... Financing 4) ... Knowledge
Unter the heading: Prospect ... of the global future / ... Of the urban future follows a short assessment
of the further development in the global context and in urban areas.
Given the upcoming decades will be characterized globally by climate crisis and resource scarcity on
the one hand and more people moving into urban areas on the other hand, the key to the solution of
these problems lie especially in the cities.

14. Potential Analysis
I. Indicators
Suggesting 15 Indicators as evaluation criteria
1. Adding value locally (v.s skimming value locally)
2. Fostering resilience (v.s. crisis prone)
3. Strewing ownership (fairer) (v.s. concentrating ownership)
4. Extending/multiplying options & roles (v.s. reducing option and roles)
5. Self-determination & participation (v.s. heteronomy)
6. Self-design/formation & co-creation (v.s. unalterable preconfiguration)
7. Promoting community & relationships / including (v.s. isolating/excluding)
8. Versatile/collaborative/communal use (v.a. exclusive/individual use (sale&one-way product)
9. Openess & transparency (v.s silo & intransparency)
10. Horizontal (peer) structure (v.s. hierarchical structures)
11. Saving/protecting resources (circular economy) (v.s. consuming/wasting resources)
12. Partizipation- & Co-creation diversity beyond money (v.s. only via money)
13. Building trust (v.s. isolation, spreading mistrust)
14. Common good oriented (vs. particular interests)
15. Basic needs (vs. luxury demand)

15. In the last part of the first chapter 15 indicators are proposed as evaluation criteria
for the Sharing & Collaborative Economy.
IMHO these apprear also helpful/desirable for the definition and normative description of Sharing
Cities respectively.
This goes back to the previously addressed crucial question WHY? E.g. guidelines.
For examples see previous slide
Following bitly.com/Indicators-CollaborativeEconomy one can find more information
and is welcomed to leave comments.

16. Potential Analysis
II: Capture of the Berlin Actors/ Mapping

17. In chapter II
follows a capture of the Berlin actors.
As easy to read from the map with its about 200 Share enterprises and initiatives – which the mapping
initiative „SharingBerlin“ has listed and which can be accessed via www.sharingberlin.de – Berlin
belongs worldwide to the cities with a big diversity of enterprises and undertakings in the field of the
Share & Collaborative Economy.
A short outline of these entities: small – big, non-commercial – commercial, follows.
The mapping distingushes the following nine areas
Work & Activities
Energy
Items
Money & other transaction systems
Community formation and self-organisation
Mobility
Food
Space
Knowledge

18. Potential Analysis
III. Results of the Online-Questionnaire
0
5
10
15
20
25
Vor2000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
k.A.
Projektanzahl

19. In chapter III
Results from a questionnaire of 90 Berlin actors of the Share & Collaborative Economy are presented.
Just some results:
The mayority are focusing on saving resources, climate protection and strengthening the
neighbourhood culture.
Most of the entities were founded in the last two years before the questionnaire took place and the
entities were in average not older than two years.
The community expects a rapid growth for the upcoming years.

20. Potential Analysis
IV: International Sharing Cities
Downtown Seoul. Foto: Craig Nagy, Wikimedia Commons Gemeinschaftsgarten auf der Insel Nodul. Foto: Chang-Woo Lee
Examples from
SEOUL/SAN FRANCISCO/BARCELONA/AMSTERDAM/
KOPENHAGEN/GHENT/HELSINKI/VANCOUVER/BERLIN

21. Chapter IV
It follows some impression from some Sharing Cities / aspects worldwide.
In juxtaposition with Seoul and San Francisco,
Berlin seems to have the highest potential in the creative and social-innovative community –
unfortunately this potential currently doesn‘t meet support from the city government side.
Here some pictures of Seoul, which publicly declared itself the first Sharing City of the world
in order to react with this approach to urban problems like smog, waste production, traffic jams,
parking & housing scarcity, resource wastefulness, poverty, young unemployment
but above all high suicide rates, overaging and loneliness.
Exempli gratia the Seoul Metropolitan Government Act for Promoting Sharing
promoting 20 Sharing programmes and policies: Support of sharing startups, communal car sharing,
public provision of tools, spaces, data, urban gardens etc. (going beyond the scope of our time frame)

22. Potential Analysis
V. Guidance/Recommendations
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Noticing & raise awareness
2. Understanding & differentiating
3. Regulating & deregulating
4. Value, display & promote
5. Cooperate & integrate
6. Profiling & reacting proactively
CONCRETE RECOMMENDATIONS (SELECTION)
1. Cross departmental working groups
2. On- & Offline platforms for collaboration
3. Bills promoting citizens engagement
non-profit & cooperative legal forms
4. Alliance of European Sharing Cities
5. Initiation of European Sharing City Resolution
6. Quality seal of eco-social products

23. In Chapter V general and concrete recommendations are made.
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Noticing & raising awareness
2. Understanding & differentiating
3. Regulating & deregulating
4. Valuing, displaying & promoting
5. Cooperating & integrating
6. Profiling & reacting proactively
Here some of the concrete recommendations applying to the city, federal and EU level.

24. Further Examples of Sharing Cities &
Public/Civic Engagement

25. You can find further activities about Sharing Cities initiatives in dozends of cities within the Sharing
Cities Network of the Onine Magazin Shareable.
They are also organizing maps jams for gathering all the initiatives. With SharingBerlinMap and
Transformap we also have co-initiated and accompanied own summarizing mappings here.

26. Sharing City Amsterdam
Quellehttp://www.collaborativeconsumption.com/2015/02/04/amsterdam-europes-first-sharing-city/ " Collaborative Economy Ecosystem" by shareNL is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0

27. And finally some examples. It would be highly recommendable (and maybe there are people in the
room here that are already working on it or could give it a push) to launch a best-practice study and
aggregate, connect and support best-practice expertise, projects and networks in this field.
Amsterdam was already mentioned as the first European City that publicly declared themselves a
Sharing City. An initiative more emerging from the civic society, startup scene, but also meeting with a
positive resonance from the city government.
In order to promote the good and reduce the bad a 5 phases plan was collectively developped. (in
bullet point form)
1. Stimulation of the Sharing Economy by collaborators and promotion of pilot projects that tackle
urban problem fields.
2. City-owned Sharing projects: vehicles, spaces
3. Safeguarding of the inclusion of all citizens through partnerships, e.g. citypass system
4. Regulating/Deregulating of sharing economy for the public benefit
5. Profiling as a Sharing City and participation at international events

28. Sharing City
City Government Provider
By Daniel*D CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3001563By Mariordo (Mario Roberto Durán Ortiz) – CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=19761037
By Hank_chapot GFDL, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=13560663

29. And finally to kick in some figures concerning city government provision
of sharing services of two cities
Paris was the first major city in Europa that - as a municipal provider –
stepped large scale into bike- and carsharing.
Vélib *15.07.2007: 14.500 bikes (Top12 - (17/Top 18 are Chinese cities)
The bikes are available at 1230 stations (Top3 – about every 300 m) (e.g.. 1 bike per 97 inhabitants)
>285,000 yearly subscribers (2014) –
financed/organised by JCDecaux – a trade-off for public advertising rights.
1 year: 20 Mio. – until 6. Jahr (2013?) 173 Mio journeys
AutoLib *12.2011: 2500 cars – 4000 charging stations (July 2014) –
>155.000 yearly subscribers
(AutoLib also operates in Lyon, Bordeaux, Brüssel, London, Indianapolis)
worldwide >600 cities with Bike Sharing models (July 2014)
Bicing *22.03. 2007 in Barcelona. 6000 bikes – 420 stations (every 300 – 400 m).
Same bikes and stations like in Stockholm, Oslo and Zaragoza
financed through car parking in public space.
Also worth mentioning is the Mayors Challenge of Bloomberg Philantropies handing out one 5
millionen $ and four 1 millionen $ prizes to cities for innovative ideas/projects.

30. Sharing City
Example Sydney
Quelle: http://www.collaborativeconsumption.com/2013/08/20/share-sydney-guide/

31. Or here a brochure in Sydney explaining the Sharing Economy by taking a 48 hour course through
various activities and services of the Shared Economy.

32. Plea for
Sharing City & Civic Society
„When artist and innovators engage, cities thrieve. Cities as platforms“ / Lisa Gansky
Raise awareness for what is happening in the
Sharing Economy. Bring community together and
invite people from all walks of life: entrepreneurs,
NGOs, activists, administrators, engaged citizens.
Build up relationships across all sectors.
Focus the question on: „How can we see and
extend the city as a sharing platform“?
And then – after introductory and contextualising
input and with the help of professional facilitators
let all participants organize and find solutions
themselves in open space formats.
And finally throw a big party to celebrate
what has been achieved collectively.“
Neal Gorenflo

33. I want to close with a plea for Sharing Cities and an increased orientation to a civic society.
Here two final quotes
Lisa Gansky, entrepreneur and author of the best-seller: The Mesh: Why the Future of Business is
Sharing.“
„When artist and innovators engage, cities thrieve. Cities as platforms“ / Lisa Gansky
Or the advice of Neal Gorenflo, publisher of the Online Magazine Shareable addressing my question
how to best approach a sharing city (2014)
Raise awareness for what is happening in the Sharing Economy.
Bring the community together and invite people from all walks of life:
entrepreneurs, NGOs, activists, administrators, engaged citizens.
Build up relationships across all sectors.
Focus the question on: „How can we see and extend the city as a sharing platform“?
And then – after introductory and contextualising input and with the help of professional facilitators let
all participants organize and find solutions themselves in open space formats.
And finally throw a big party to celebrate what has been achieved collectively.“
Neal Gorenflo

34. Vielen Dank!
Thomas Dönnebrink
OuiShare Connector Germany
Freelancer Collaborative Economy
www.about.me/thomasdoennebrink
thomas@ouishare.net
@tdoennebrink
+49 176 32335744

35. About Thomas Dönnebrink
lives in Berlin, OuiShare Connector and Freelancer. Current focus on the characteristics of new and old
economy and the convergence of ideas, concepts and movements in the context of the unfolding
transformation of our economy and society in general and of platform cooperativism – as one field
where convergence is taking place - in particular.
LinkedIn Profil - thomas@ouishare.net - @tdoennebrink - +49 176 32335744

36. Community Building
1 Magazin ouishare.net
4 Globale Konferenzen
2 Touren (LATAM/Europa
8 Internationale Summits
100+ Facebook Gruppen
200+ OuiShare Events
2000+ Mitglieder
34000+ Facebook Fans
> 30 cities in Europa, Lateinamerica & Near Osten
4. Internationale Konferenz. 18.-21.Mai 2016
“After the Gold Rush”

37. About OuiShare
OuiShare originated four years ago in Paris out of a blog around the topic of collaborative
consumption.
In the meantime it has developed into an international peer-network with several thousand members
and the object of study increasingly broadens becoming more holistic.
As a movement, think and do-tank OuiShare has organized by now several hundred events in a few
dozens cities in Europe, the Americas and the Near East.
Since 2013 the three-day OuiShareFest takes place in Paris in May. As biggest event around the
collaborative economy and society it attracts each year more than 1000+ participants and experts from
around the world.
Values
Openness – Transparency – Independence – Impact – Feedback –
Action – MPRL (Meet People in Real Life) – PermanentBeta – Inclusion - Play