Citizens & Living
News

The heat transition is in full swing. Municipalities want their residents off the gas and want them to switch to renewable sources of heat. Unfortunately, heat grids have often led to frustrated residents. Which in turn has led to delayed or cancelled plans for the municipality.

Dave van Loon and Marieke van Doorninck (Kennisland) have looked into the problems surrounding heat grids and came up with a plan. In this Demoday work-session we dived into the problems surrounding heat grids and their plan to solve them. The session was moderated by our own Leonie van Beuken.

Why residents get frustrated with heat grid plans

Involving residents in the planning of a heat grid is difficult. It takes a lot of time and effort and the municipality is often in a hurry. This is why they choose for a compromise in which they already make the plan, but try to involve citizens at the end part. However, this leads to residents not having anything to say in the plans. They can block the plans, but they can’t really make changes. This leads to a lot of dissatisfaction.

This top-down approach doesn't seem to be ideal for involving residents in the heat transition. That's why Kennisland is working on developing a plan for early collaboration with residents in the heat transition of neighbourhoods, with a focus on connecting with the community's concerns.

They have seen that this kind of approach can be successful by looking at the K-buurt in Amsterdam-Zuid-Oost. In the initial stages, the first plan for the K-buurt didn't gain much traction. However, when they shifted towards a more collaborative approach, people felt empowered to engage, leading to a more meaningful participation process. Instead of traditional town hall meetings, discussions took place in community spaces like the local barber shop. This shift towards genuine participation and co-creation has resulted in a much-improved end product, one that residents truly support and believe in.

The plan for co-creation in the heat transition

The plan that Kennisland came up with consists of a few key points that are necessary for success:
• Engage with residents early on in the process.
• Also consider other issues in the neighbourhood. There might be more pressing concerns for the residents themselves.
• Ensure accessibility for everyone to participate.
• Truly collaborate on developing a list of requirements.
• Harness creativity.
• Work in a less compartmentalized manner.
They aim to form a neighbourhood alliance and organize a community council. Together a plan can be made for the neighbourhood that all residents can get behind.
This plan might take a bit longer at the start, but that investment in time will pay itself back in the end.

SWOT analysis of co-creation plan

After Dave and Marieke explained their plan we did a SWOT analysis with the group. We looked at the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of the plan.

The main strength that was pointed out was the ability to make a plan together with the residents. The residents experience the neighbourhood differently than a government official, which makes the final plan more beneficial to everyone.

The weaknesses the group saw in the plan were mainly that this could potentially slow down the process. Should we maybe do less participation instead of more and use force to get this heat transition going?

There were a lot of opportunities identified for this plan. The quality of the plan (and the neighbourhood) can greatly increase. By slowing down at the start we can actually accelerate and improve the neighbourhood on many levels. This plan also offers a great learning experience.

Finally, we went into the threats. One of the big threats that was pointed out was the lack of trust. If residents don’t trust the municipality and the process then it will never be possible to let this plan succeed. The explanation to residents also needs to be understandable. The explanation around a heat grid can get technical very quickly, and residents often don’t have the background to understand everything. The last threat that was pointed out was that if you get a lot of input from the residents for the plan, you also have to do something with that, and still be realistic. You have to work hard to manage expectations.

We completed the session by asking the participants if they knew any partners and places to collaborate with for this plan, or if they had any other ideas to make this plan successful.

We would now like to ask the same questions to you! Do you know someone who would like to partner up with Kennisland, do you know a place where this plan can be tested, or do you have any other ideas? Let us know by contacting me at noor@amsterdamsmartcity.com.

During our 23rd Demo Day on April 18, 2024, Ruben Polderman told us more about the philosophy and method of Socratic Design. It's important for a city to collectively reflect on a good existence. Socratic Design can be a way to think about this together, collectively.
 
Thinking and Acting Differently with Socratic Design
Together with his colleagues at the Digitalization & Innovation department of the Municipality of Amsterdam, Ruben explored how a city should deal with innovation and digitalization. Things were progressing well. The municipality could act swiftly; for example, promising Smart Mobility research and innovation projects were initiated with new partners. However, the transitions are heading in various directions, and progress remains limited. No matter how groundbreaking innovation is, there's a danger in trying to solve problems with the same mindset that caused them. The ability to perceive or think differently is therefore crucial. More crucial, even, than accumulated knowledge, as filosopher David Bohm suggested.
 
Through Socratic Design, we can collectively improve the latter. You work on your own presuppositions, enhance your listening skills, and deepen your understanding of our current dominant narratives to create new narratives and practices. Ruben guided us through examples and exercises to help us understand what narratives and presuppositions entail.

Narratives
"We think we live in reality, but we live in a narrative," Ruben proposes to the group. What we say to each other and how we interact creates a culture that shapes the group and its actions. Narratives are stories that guide our culture, values, thoughts, and actions. They are paradigms so deeply rooted that we no longer question them and sometimes believe there is no alternative. Our current dominant narrative has significant consequences for the Earth and humanity, and although it seems fixed, we can also create new narratives together if we choose to do so.

We must fundamentally seek a good existence within safe ecological boundaries. This should go beyond the transitions we are currently favouring, which sustain our lifestyle but just make it less harmful for the environment. If we want to create new stories with new, positive human perceptions and lifestyles, we must first examine our current narrative and presuppositions. We will need to deconstruct our current ways of living and thinking, much like the Theory U method mentioned during the previous Knowledge Session (see our recap article of this session).
 
Understanding Presuppositions
Ruben showed us various themes and images to collectively practice recognizing presuppositions. For example, a photo of a medical patient and doctors in action demonstrates that our feeling of "to measure is to know" is also crucial in healthcare. The doctors focus on the screen, the graph, the numbers, and therefore have less focus on the patient; the human, themselves. A photo of the stock market, where a group of men is busy trading stocks, also illustrates our idea of economic growth. Here too, there is a fixation on numbers. Ideally, they're green and going up, but meanwhile, we can lose sight of what exactly we're working towards and what exactly it is that we’re ‘growing’.

As a group, we discussed some presuppositions we could find in our field of work. For example, we talked about our need for and appreciation of objective data, and technologism; the belief in solutions rooted in technology and digitalization.
 
Fundamental Presupposition Shifts and New Narratives
If you flip a presupposition like Technologism and suggest that Social Interaction could be our salvation and solution to many of our problems, you set off a fundamental presupposition shift. If you translate this into practical actions or experiments, you can collectively understand how a newly created presupposition functions. As a group, we worked on this. During this session, I myself worked with an example from the field of mobility.

If I were to apply this new presupposition in the field of mobility and we look at the development of cars, perhaps we shouldn't go towards autonomous vehicles (technologism), but look for ways to motivate and strengthen carpooling (social interaction). As an experiment, you could, for example, set up an alternative to the conventional car lease plan. Employees of an organization don't all get the option to lease a car; instead, it's considered who could commute together, and there's a maximum of 1 car for every 4 employees per organization. Just like going to an away game with your soccer team on Sundays as a kid; enjoyable!
 
Read More
This session was an introduction and gave us a good initial understanding of this philosophy and method, but there's much more to discover. The method also delves into how presuppositions are deeply rooted in us, how we validate this with feeling in our bodies, and dialogue methods to collectively arrive at new values and narratives. There's more explained about Socratic Design on Amsterdam's Open Research platform.

In a world where moving yourself from point A to point B is becoming much more crucial than ever, there are people out there who cannot experience such a luxury at the flick of a wrist, or perhaps the clack of an ankle? It is hard to imagine sometimes, but there are those who cannot move around as easily as others; be it because of financial, physical, vehicular, or other reasons. A community that can go about as they please without any issues is a happy community that is beneficial to society – For a collective of governments and businesses it is in their best interests to ensure citizens can experience freedom and liberty in their mobility. The question of how to achieve this freedom in mobility and how to deter against injustices regarding mobility remains a hot topic, however. On behalf of Provincie Noord Holland and in collaboration with Amsterdam Smart City and Amsterdam Centre of Expertise, a group of graduating students tackled this topic on the latest Demoday of 2024.

Starting the voyage : What are mobility injustices?
A value workshop led by Jackie Ippel and Jade Salomons engaged the participants in a fun, creative wave of brain-crackling activities. Participants were presented with a question of whether they knew what mobility injustices, or as we call it in Dutch “Mobiliteits Armoede”, was. An explanation of which followed suit soon after. Mobility Injustices, as described by the KiM organization, explains the inability or difficulties people experience in terms of reaching activity locations due to inadequate transport options, combined with socio-economic and spatial conditions in which people find themselves. As a result, they are often hindered in their participation in social life, which negatively affects their quality of life.

It is important to think about the definition of what exactly mobility injustices entail, as it helps us find a better understanding in finding a creative series of solutions that will solve this complex jigsaw puzzle.

Like a ball of yarn : unraveling theorems.
In order to stimulate the brain of each participant and to get the blood pumping through their legs, each participant was asked to stand in the middle of the room. As was once quoted in the horror thriller Saw; “Wanna play a game?”. Participants were presented with a series of theorems in which they had to make a choice that’d question their liberal thoughts; either stand on one side of the room for one answer or on the other side for the other – No in-betweens. Being forced to make ultimatums proved to be both challenging for the participants yet fun, as it was met with bountiful heaps of enthusiasm. In the first theorem, participants were presented with a question of whether or not mobility should be a fundamental right for each and every citizen. While agreed one did not, but can their minds be changed? A flurry of other theorems were presented, each of which dove deeper into the depths of dilemmas one may encounter when attempting to solve the puzzle of mobility inequality. Like who is more important, those who have low incomes or those who suffer from physical and mental disabilities which hinder their day-to-day lives? Brief discussions flowed forth after each and every theorem, after each voting round, reasons were given as to why one can choose one over the other. After which another second voting session followed. Perhaps new insights would change one’s opinion on the subject? It actually did once or twice! Such is the power of dialogue.

Embarking into the abyss : Worst Idea Possible.
“How ba-a-a-ad can I be? I’m just doing what comes naturally-“ -such were the words Onceler sung in Dr. Seuss’s ‘The Lorax’. While people do not like the idea of being bad or thinking of bad ideas sometimes this way of thinking can actually bring plentiful new insights never thought of before. The group split itself in two, each of which under the guidance of either Jackie Ippel or Jade Salomons. Participants were asked to come with their most horrid, ludicrous ideas that’d actually make mobility injustices worse. After which they had to decide what element made this a bad idea. Example, if public transport were to be described, the element that’d make the idea bad would be less alternatives for traveling. The final and third part of this exercise required something rather unique however. Does your mind already wonder what? Well, it’s quite simple really, now participants had to come up with what would be the opposite of their bad idea! So what would their idea be in reverse, an actual solution to the problem they created. If your bad solution was to make everything only scannable by QR-codes its reverse solution would be… using solely physical text! For a solid 20 minutes participants racked their heads and discussed until their times were down to only 5 minutes left. The last of those minutes left were spent discussing and laughing about their ideas – A method met with confusion at first was appreciated with loads of enthusiasm by the end where only time was the fun killer.

A creative view found in madness: Crazy Eight.

The creativity cannot just end after one session. Holding the thought of the previous session, participants were asked to gather in a circle around a table. With each given a paper and asked to fold it so that 8 separate square spaces would form on the sheet the Crazy Eight exercise was explained. Participants were asked to draw their solution one of their 8 square. For each drawing they had a minute per square, a total of 8 minutes until all were filled. Of course with so little time there was little room for thinking, imagination had to pull the cart here, which led to both silly and unique drawings. The longer the session went on the more difficult it became – the participants were truly pushed to their creative limits. A well-trained eye could even notice how some participants still tried to finish their previous drawing before moving onto the next despite the time. You could feel the atmosphere in the room shift to a hectic, almost crazy aura, thus doing its name of ‘Crazy Eight’ truly justice.

At the end of the session it was only natural that people presented their top 3 drawings. One after another each participant proudly showed off their creative drawings like a trophy to the rest of the group. Turns out, despite not communicating with one another during the drawing sessions there were lots of similarities in the elements used in each drawing. The bus, the civil servant, and the elderly were commonly used elements seen back in almost everyone’s drawing. Via these sources of inspiration it became clear just where the solutions may lie.

An journey’s end : Results.

At the end of the session we didn’t just start talking about what we had done. No, instead we At the end of the session, we didn’t just start talking about what we had done. No, instead we went back and looked at the very first theorem everyone was presented with; “Should mobility be a fundamental right for each and every citizen?”. Last time everyone answered all but one was in favor of this theorem, now participants were asked to revise their statement and see if they still agreed with what they said at the beginning. As said before, dialogue can change the outlook we have on the world and so someone did change their stance – The one person that disagreed with the theorem now actually agreed that mobility should be a fundamental right. A full 100% score! Only after this a talk about what we had done started. Opinions were asked and each participant shared the emotion they had experienced during this work session and to leave it behind on a post-it.

·       Fun and insightful: The gamification of thinking is taking the design world by storm, and on this Demoday, it has proven that this form of design thinking can not only be effective in bringing brand new insights but also can be fun.

·       Enthusiasm: What started off with an iffy approach ended with tons of enthusiasm. Idea generating doesn’t just have to be sitting at a table and talking in your own bubble; it can become so much more effective when the mood is changed from serious and gloomy to frivolous and enthusiastic..

·       Creativity: A creative way of thinking actually helps in generating ideas. Using playful thinking such as considering a bad idea first and then the opposite helps find solutions to problems in a much more efficient way.

During this Demoday, we as a group of graduating students got to know the thought process behind those who work within the field of mobility. While we hope that we brought them plenty of insights and, above all, a fun day, it is sufficient to say that we too learned an abundance of information. The insights made during the Demoday will be used by us in writing our final report for the Provincie Noord Holland regarding a detailed consult on how to improve the mobility of the citizens of the province of Noord-Holland and how to tackle the injustices surrounding mobility. Demoday’s are fun and can inspire even the most closed-minded people. If we could, we would do it all over again. And, if you are still on the fence about joining a Demoday, then I hope that column will ignite that curiosity.

Urbanisation in the US is undergoing major changes. The image of a central city surrounded by sprawling suburbs therefore needs to be updated. The question is what place does the 15-minute city have in it? That is what this somewhat longer post is about
 
From the 1950s, residents of US cities began moving en masse to the suburbs. A detached house in the green came within reach for the middle and upper classes, and the car made it possible to commute daily to factories and offices. These were initially still located in and around the cities. The government stimulated this development by investing billions in the road network.
From the 1980s, offices also started to move away from the big cities. They moved to attractive locations, often near motorway junctions. Sometimes large shopping and entertainment centres also settled there, and flats were built on a small scale for supporting staff. Garreau called such cities 'edge cities'.
Investors built new suburbs called 'urban villages' in the vicinity of the new office locations, significantly reducing the distance to the offices. This did not reduce congestion on congested highways.
 
However, more and more younger workers had no desire to live in suburbs. The progressive board of Arlington, near Washington DC, took the decision in the 1980s to develop a total of seven walkable, inclusive, attractive and densely built-up cores in circles of up to 800 metres around metro stations. In each was a wide range of employment, flats, shops and other amenities . In the process, the Rosslyn-Balston Corridor emerged and experienced rapid growth. The population of the seven cores now stands at 71,000 out of a total of 136,000 jobs. 36% of all residents use the metro or bus for commuting, which is unprecedentedly high for the US. The Rosslyn-Balston Corridor is a model for many other medium-sized cities in the US, such as New Rochelle near new York.
 
Moreover, to meet the desire to live within walking distance of all daily amenities, there is a strong movement to also regenerate the suburbs themselves. This is done by building new centres in the suburbs and densifying part of the suburbs.
The new centres have a wide range of flats, shopping facilities, restaurants and entertainment centres.  Dublin Bridge Park, 30 minutes from Columbus (Ohio) is one of many examples.
It is a walkable residential and commercial area and an easily accessible centre for residents from the surrounding suburbs. It is located on the site of a former mall.
 
Densification of the suburbs is necessary because of the high demand for (affordable) housing, but also to create sufficient support for the new centres.
Space is plentiful. In the suburbs, there are thousands of (semi-)detached houses that are too large for the mostly older couples who occupy them. An obvious solution is to split the houses, make them energy-positive and turn them into two or three starter homes. There are many examples how this can be done in a way that does not affect the identity of the suburbs (image).
New construction in suburbs
 
This kind of solution is difficult to realise because the municipal authorities concerned are bound by decades-old zoning plans, which prescribe in detail what can be built somewhere. Some of the residents fiercely oppose changing the laws. Especially in California, the NIMBYs (not in my backyard) and the YIMBYs (yes in my backyard) have a stranglehold on each other and housing construction is completely stalled.
 
But even without changing zoning laws, there are incremental changes.  Here and there, for instance, garages, usually intended for two or three cars, are being converted into 'assessor flats' for grandma and grandpa or for children who cannot buy a house of their own.  But garden houses are also being added and souterrains constructed. Along the path of gradualness, this adds thousands of housing units, without causing much fuss.
 
It is also worth noting that small, sometimes sleepy towns seem to be at the beginning of a period of boom.  They are particularly popular with millennials. These towns are eminently 'walkable' , the houses are not expensive and there is a wide range of amenities. The distance to the city is long, but you can work well from home and that is increasingly the pattern. The pandemic and the homeworking it has initiated has greatly increased the popularity of this kind of residential location.
 
All in all, urbanisation in the US can be typified by the creation of giant metropolitan areas, across old municipal boundaries. These areas are a conglomeration of new cities, rivalling the old mostly shrinking and poverty-stricken cities in terms of amenities, and where much of employment is in offices and laboratories. In between are the suburbs, with a growing variety of housing. The aim is to create higher densities around railway stations. Besides the older suburbs, 'urban villages' have emerged in attractive locations. More and more suburbs are getting their own walkable centres, with a wide range of flats and facilities. Green space has been severely restricted by these developments.
 
According to Christopher Leinberger, professor of real estate and urban analysis at George Washington University, there is no doubt that in the US, walkable, attractive cores with a mixed population and a varied housing supply following the example of the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor are the future. In addition, walkable car-free neighbourhoods, with attractive housing and ample amenities are in high demand in the US. Some of the 'urban villages' are developing as such.  The objection is that these are 'walkable islands', rising in an environment that is anything but walkable. So residents always have one or two cars in the car park for when they leave the neighbourhood, as good metro or train connections are scarce. Nor are these kinds of neighbourhoods paragons of a mixed population; rents tend to be well above the already unaffordable average.
 
The answer of the question in the header therefore is: locally and slowly

Do you want to learn from and network with the best researchers and scientists working to tackle pressing urban challenges?
 
AMS Institute, is organizing the AMS Scientific Conference from April 23-25 at the Marineterrein, Amsterdam, to address pressing urban challenges. The event is organized in collaboration with the City of Amsterdam.
 
The conference brings together leading institutions in urban research and innovation, thought leaders, municipalities, researchers, and practitioners to explore innovative solutions for sustainable development in Amsterdam and other global cities. 
 
Keynotes, research workshops, learning tracks, and special sessions will explore the latest papers in the fields of mobility, circularity, energy transition, climate adaptation, urban food systems, digitization, diversity, inclusion, living labs experimentation, and transdisciplinary research.
 
Attendees can expect to gain valuable insights into cutting-edge research and engage in meaningful discussions with leading experts in their field. You can see the full program and all available sessions here.
 
This year's theme is 'Blueprints for messy cities? Navigating the interplay of order and messiness'. 
 
The program
 
Day 1: The good, the bad, and the ugly
Keynotes by Paul Behrens of Leiden University and Elin Andersdotter Fabre of UN-Habitat will be followed by a city panel including climate activist <strong>Hannah Prins</strong>. The first day concludes with a dinner at the Koepelkerk in Amsterdam: you're welcome to join our three-course meal with a 50 euro ticket.
 
Day 2️: Amazing discoveries
Keynotes by Carlo Ratti of MIT and Sacha Stolp of the Municipality of Amsterdam discuss innovation and research in cities. <strong>Corinne Vigreux</strong>, co-founder of TomTom, and Erik Versnel from Rabobank will participate in the city panel.
 
Day 3️: We are the city
Keynotes by Paul Chatterton of Leeds University and Victor Neequaye Kotey Deputy Director of the Waste Management Department of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly, Ghana. They discuss how we shape the future of our cities together. This will be followed by a city panel including Ria Braaf-Fränkel of WomenMakeTheCity and prof. dr. Aleid Brouwer of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
 
To buy tickets: You can secure your conference tickets through our website.
Dinner tickets: On April 23 we’re hosting a dinner at the Koepelkerk in Amsterdam. Tickets for this can be added to your conference pass or bought separately. 

We hebben uiteenlopende en interessante reacties ontvangen van stedenbouwkundigen, architecten en gemeenten. Als u wilt weten wat andere professionals denken, vul dan deze enquête in met uw e-mailadres en wij delen de inzichten met u.

Bedankt! 😀

Follow Playground on LinkedIn

We've received varied and interesting responses from urban developers, architects, and municipalities. If you want to know what other professionals think, please fill out this survey with your email, and we will share the insights with you.

Thank you! 😀

A previous post made it clear that a 15-minute city ideally consists of a 5-minute walking zone, a 15-minute walking zone, also a 5-minute cycling zone and a the 15-minute cycling zone. These three types of neighbourhoods and districts should be developed in conjunction, with employment accessibility also playing an important role.
 
In the plans for 15-minute cities in many places around the world, these types of zones intertwine, and often it is not even clear which type of zone is meant.  In Paris too, I miss clear choices in this regard.
 
The city of Melbourne aims to give a local lifestyle a dominant place among all residents. Therefore, everyone should live within at most 10 minutes' walking distance to and from all daily amenities.  For this reason, it is referred to as a 20-minute city, whereas in most examples of a 15-minute city, such as Paris, it is only about <strong>the round trip</strong>. The policy in Melbourne has received strong support from the health sector, which highlights the negative effects of traffic and air pollution.
 
In Vancouver, there is talk of a 5-minute city. The idea is for neighbourhoods to become more distinct parts of the city. Each neighbourhood should have several locally owned shops as well as public facilities such as parks, schools, community centres, childcare and libraries. High on the agenda is the push for greater diversity of residents and housing types. Especially in inner-city neighbourhoods, this is accompanied by high densities and high-rise buildings. Confronting this idea with reality yields a pattern of about 120 such geographical units (see map above).
 
Many other cities picked up the idea of the 15-minute city.  Among them: Barcelona, London, Milan, Ottawa, Detroit and Portland. The organisation of world cities C40 (now consisting of 96 cities) elevated the idea to the main policy goal in the post-Covid period.
 
All these cities advocate a reversal of mainstream urbanisation policies. In recent decades, many billions have been invested in building roads with the aim of improving accessibility. This means increasing the distance you can travel in a given time. As a result, facilities were scaled up and concentrated in increasingly distant places. This in turn led to increased congestion that negated improvements in accessibility. The response was further expansion of the road network.  This phenomenon is known as the 'mobility trap' or the Marchetti constant.
 
Instead of increasing accessibility, the 15-minute city aims to expand the number of urban functions you can access within a certain amount of time. This includes employment opportunities. The possibility of working from home has reduced the relevance of the distance between home and workplace. In contrast, the importance of a pleasant living environment has increased. A modified version of the 15-minute city, the 'walkable city' then throws high hopes. That, among other things, is the subject of my next post.

From March 4 to April 5, Amsterdam Smart City (ASC) collaborated with international peers from 77 cities across Europe in a series of online knowledge and inspiration sessions during the Intelligent Cities Challenge (ICC) Implementation Lab. The focus was on sharing best practices and building knowledge for implementing Local Green Deals (LGDs) to accelerate the transformation towards sustainability based on the principles of good governance, policy integration, partnership with local stakeholders.
 
Colleagues, partners, and experts from the Amsterdam Smart City network shared insights in several thematic and training sessions, including:
•      Mobility & Transport Thematic Session: Pelle Menke shared the approach and lessons from ASC's Mobility Justice Challenge, while Diederik Basta introduced the City of Amsterdam's participation in the Gemini project, supporting residents in starting local, shared mobility cooperatives through a "Mobility as a Commons" (MaaC) approach.
•      Local Green Deals Training Session: Egon van Wees presented Amsterdam's experience in setting up nine Impact Deals with social enterprises under the CLIMAA Local Green Deals project. The evaluation indicates that these deals have resulted in the creation of 105 jobs for people with barriers to the labor market and a reduction of 92 tonnes of CO2 emissions. Amsterdam, in collaboration with Aalborg (Denmark), also developed a framework now utilized by other cities in setting up similar Impact Deals.
•      Social Economy Thematic Session: Frits Verhoef shared lessons from his involvement in two local energy cooperatives, including the pioneering work of NDSM-Energie in developing a 15MW wind park in the NoorderIJplas area, highlighting various financial and political barriers yet to be overcome. Frits also his work with MeerEnergie, a cooperative aiming to establish a heating network owned by local residents in the Watergraafsmeer district of Amsterdam, utilizing waste heat from nearby data centers.
 
What's Next?
Amsterdam Smart City is excited to host the ICC network in Amsterdam for a Mobility Field Visit in May, showcasing best practices for public-private collaboration in sustainable and smart mobility. We also look forward to connecting with ICC peers in person during the upcoming ICC conference in Porto in June.
 
More Information
For further details about the Implementation Lab and upcoming ICC activities, visit the ICC website: https://www.intelligentcitieschallenge.eu/events/icc-implementation-lab-1

Stakeholders in the Amsterdam Region interested in more information or wishing to connect to the ICC network during upcoming labs or other similar sessions can reach out to ASC International Liaison via cornelia@amsterdamsmartcity.com

Due to a long stay in the hospital, I was unable to post my columns. I also cannot guarantee their continuity in the near future, but I will do my best... 

In my previous post, I emphasised that urban densification should be coordinated with other claims on space. These are: expanding blue-green infrastructure and the desire to combine living and working. I am also thinking of urban horticulture. It is therefore unlikely that all the necessary housing in the Netherlands - mentioned is a number of one million housing units - can be realised in the existing built-up area. Expansion into rural areas is then inevitable and makes it possible to improve the quality of these rural areas. Densification of the many villages and small towns in our country enable to approach them from the '15-minute principle' as well. Villages should thereby become large enough to support at least a small supermarket, primary school and health centre, but also to accommodate small businesses. A fast and frequent public transport-connection to a city, to other villages and to a railway station in the vicinity is important.
 
A thorny issue is the quality of nature in the rural area. Unfortunately, it is in bad shape. A considerable part of the rural area consists of grass plots with large-scale agro-industrial use and arable land on which cattle feed is grown. Half of the Netherlands is for cows, which, incidentally, are mostly in stalls. Restoring nature in the area that is predominantly characterised by large-scale livestock farming, is an essential task for the coming decades.
 
The development of sufficiently dense built-up areas both in cities and villages and the development of new nature around and within those cities and villages is a beckoning prospect. This can be done by applying the idea of 'scheggen' in and around medium-sized and large cities. These are green zones that penetrate deep into the urban area. New residential and work locations can then join the already built-up area, preferably along existing railway lines and (fast) bus connections. These neighbourhoods can be built in their entirety with movement on foot and by bicycle as a starting point. The centre is a small densely built-up central part, where the desired amenities can be found.
 
In terms of nature development, depending on the possibilities of the soil, I am thinking of the development of forest and heath areas and lush grasslands, combined with extensive livestock farming, small-scale cultivation of agricultural and horticultural products for the benefit of nearby city, water features with a sponge function with partly recreational use, and a network of footpaths and cycle paths. Picture above: nature development and stream restoration (Photo: Bob Luijks) 

Below you can link to my free downloadable e-book: 25 Building blocks to create better streets, neighborhoods and cities

Amsterdam UMC, OLVG en het Antoni van Leeuwenhoek (AVL) gaan elkaars medische data gepseudonimiseerd hergebruiken in Health Data Space Amsterdam.

HDSA is een geheel nieuwe, regionale zorgdata-infrastructuur. Deze ondersteunt patiëntenzorg en medisch wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar gezondheid en preventie. Met als doel: gezondheidsverschillen in de regio te verkleinen en de gezondheidszorg toegankelijk te houden.

Het initiatief van de drie Amsterdamse ziekenhuizen komt voort uit een bredere samenwerking met de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Gemeente Amsterdam, Amsterdam Economic Board en Philips. Verder trekken de ziekenhuizen nauw op met Amsterdam AI, het Amsterdamse samenwerkingsverband voor kunstmatige intelligentie, en Health-RI, dat zich inzet voor een landelijke geïntegreerde gezondheidsdata-infrastructuur voor onderzoek, beleid en innovatie.

HDSA faciliteert met deze betere en snellere uitwisseling van zorgdata wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar gezondheid, beter medisch inzicht in hoe mensen langdurig gezond kunnen blijven, gepersonaliseerde preventie en behandeling van ziekten. De samenwerking is een eerste stap in de aansluiting op (een nog te bouwen) nationale infrastructuur vanuit het Integraal Zorgakkoord (IZA) en een Europese samenwerking via het European Health Data Space (EHDS).

Lees het complete bericht via

Hoe zetten we Data in voor leefbare straten, buurten en steden? En heb je die datasets echt zo hard nodig? "Of heb je de bewoner al voor je, kun je aan tafel, en kun je gewoon samen van start gaan met een idee?" (aldus Luc Manders).
 
Op 29 februari kwamen we in een volle Culture Club (Amsterdamse Hogeschool voor de Kunsten) bijeen om het te hebben over Data en Leefbare Wijken. In een fijne samenwerking met onze partner Hieroo en SeederDeBoer nodigden we verschillende sprekers en onze communities uit op het Marineterrein Amsterdam.  

Leefbare wijken op de kaart en het visueel maken van data.

Sahar Tushuizen en Martijn Veenstra (Gemeente Amsterdam) namen verschillende kaarten mee om ons te laten zien hoe visuele data weergaven worden ingezet bij het maken van verstedelijkingsstrategieën, omgevingsvisies en beleid.

Een stad is opgebouwd uit verschillende wijken en gebieden. Simpel gezegd; in sommige wijken wordt vooral ‘gewoond’, in andere gebieden vooral gewerkt, en in sommige wijken vindt er een mooie functiemenging plaats. Samen zorgt dit voor een balans, en maakt het de stad. Maar vooral de wijken met een functiemix maken fijne wijken om in te leven, aldus Sahar en Martijn. Door de spreiding van functies visueel te maken met kaarten kan je inzichtelijk maken hoe het nu is verdeeld in Amsterdam, en inspelen op de gebieden waar functiemenging misschien wel erg achterloopt. Stedelijke vernieuwing is uiteindelijk ook een sociaal project. Het gaat niet alleen over stenen plaatsen, we moeten het ook koppelen aan bereikbaarheid en/van voorzieningen.

Sahar en Martijn gebruiken hun kaarten en gekleurde vlekken om de leefbaarheid van wijken terug te laten komen in Amsterdamse visies. Maar de kaarten vertellen niet het hele verhaal, benoemen ze op het einde van hun presentatie. “We gaan ook in gesprek met inwoners hoe functies en buurtactoren worden ervaren en gewaardeerd”. Dit maakte een mooi bruggetje naar de volgende twee sprekers.  

Welzijnsdashboard.nl

Hebe Verrest (Professor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam) nam ons daarna mee in het verhaal van welzijnsdashboard.nl. Een samenwerkingsproject tussen Amsterdamse buurtbewoners (Venserpolder) en onderzoekers van de UvA.

Dit project vond haar oorsprong in twee ontwikkelingen: Er zijn de bewoners die zich niet altijd kunnen herkennen in het beeld dat over hun wijk en economisch welzijn bestaat, en zich niet gehoord voelen in verbeterprocessen in hun eigen omgeving. En dan zijn er ook de wetenschappers die merkten dat data over levens vaak nauw economisch gestuurd is. De data en het meten ervan gebeurt op een hoog schaalniveau, en dus vroegen onderzoekers zich af hoe je op lokale schaal kunt meten met meetinstrumenten die van nature democratischer zijn.

Onderzoekers van de UvA en bewoners van de wijk Venserpolder (Amsterdam Zuid-Oost) creëerden daarom samen een dashboard. De bewoners mochten meedenken wat het dashboard allemaal voor functies had, en het belangrijkste; ze mochten samen de variabele indicatoren bedenken die ze van belang vonden voor de buurt. Met behulp van de samengestelde indicatoren konden ze hun (persoonlijke) ervaringen vertalen naar data over de leefbaarheid en staat van hun buurt. De bewoners ervaarden meer zeggenschap en gehoor, en werden steeds beter in het werken met het dashboard en het vertalen van persoonlijke ervaringen naar wat algemenere data. De onderzoekers leerden met het dashboard over het ophalen van subjectieve, maar bruikbare data. En ten slotte was het voor beleidsmedewerkers en experts een mooie middel om een mix van ‘verhalen uit de buurt’ en abstractere data te verkrijgen.  

Het project loopt nog steeds en zal worden toegepast op verschillende buurten. Voor nu sloot Hebe haar presentatie af met een belangrijke learning: "Wat de bewoners belangrijke variabelen vinden, lijken ook die te zijn waar een probleem speelt".  

Van data naar datum

Ten slotte hield Luc Manders (Buurtvolk) een inspirerend pleidooi over zijn ervaringen met interventies in kwetsbare wijken. Hoewel data zeker bruikbaar kan zijn voor het signaleren en voorspellen van problemen, wilde hij het publiek tonen dat het uiteindelijk vooral gaat om het in gang zetten van een dialoog en interventie, samen mét de buurtbewoners.

Data kan zeker bruikbaar zijn voor het signaleren en voorspellen van problemen. Het in kaart brengen van risico’s in wijken kan ons tonen waar actie nodig is, maar uiteindelijk gaat leefbaarheid en welzijn over een geleefde werkelijkheid. Het gevaar is dat we blindstaren op data en kaarten en dat we de kaarten ‘beter’ maken, in plaats van iets echt in gang zetten in de wijk zelf. Want ook daar waar de cijfers verbetering aangeven, kunnen nog steeds dingen spelen die we niet weten te vangen met onze data en meetinstrumenten.

Luc noemde zijn presentatie daarom ‘Van data naar datum’. We zouden het iets minder mogen hebben over data, en het méér moeten hebben over de datum waarop we van start gaan met een project, een initiatief of een dialoog met buurtbewoners. Het liefst gaan we zo snel mogelijk met de bewoner aan tafel en zetten we iets in gang. Het begint bij het delen van verhalen en ervaringen over de situatie in de wijk, deze gaan verder dan cijfers die hoogover zijn opgehaald. Dan kan er samen met de bewoners worden nagedacht over een interventie die de wijk ten goede zou komen. Luc benadrukte hierbij ook dat we nog in te korte termijnen denken. Projecten van 2 jaar en professionals die zich 2 jaar in een wijk vastbijten vinden we al een mooie prestatie. Maar interventies in het sociaal domein hebben langer nodig. We zouden moeten denken in investeringen van bijvoorbeeld 10 jaar, zo kunnen we samen met bewoners meer leren van elkaar en meer vertrouwen op bouwen, en hoeven we niet steeds het wiel opnieuw uit te vinden.

Luc deelde ervaringsvoorbeelden, waarbij kleine interventies positieve bij-effecten in gang zetten, en moedigde het publiek aan: "Kosten en investeringen zullen aan de voorkant komen en blijven. Maar blijf het langdurig doen, leer samen met de bewoners, en denk aan het sneeuwbaleffect dat kleine interventies in gang zetten".

Dank aan de sprekers voor hun verhalen en het publiek voor de levendige discussies na afloop. Wil je bij onze volgende Data Dilemma's zijn? De volgende editie van deze serie open events vindt plaats op 30 mei. Het onderwerp en de sprekers worden binnenkort bekendgemaakt via ons platform en LinkedIn. Tot dan!

Exciting news! We're happy to announce the launch of the Circular Innovation Collective program guide!

Launched during the #WeekofCircularEconomy2024, the guide is a practical roadmap for local governments to foster circular innovation within their cities and regions.

Gathering insights from its first pilot program in the Metropolitan Region Amsterdam, the guide offers practical and comprehensive instructions for scoping out, designing, and executing local innovation programs. Here’s what Egon van Wees from Amsterdam Impact said about the program:

"To transition to an impact economy we need to radically change our approach. We need to work with front runners and entrepreneurs that tackle societal challenges and influence the broader ecosystem. With the CIC approach you can do just that.” - Egon Van Wees, Program Coordinator, Amsterdam Impact (CIC program Funder).

Wanting to empower other cities and regions across Europe, the CIC is sharing its FREE program guide to accelerate the transition to the new circular economy.

Download the guide in the link below

The Circular Innovation Collective is a consortium of impact-driven organizations initiated by Metabolic, Impact Hub Amsterdam, and Bankers without Boundaries. With the support of the City of Amsterdam (Amsterdam Impact), The DOEN Foundation, and Goldschmeding Foundation, this initiative specifically targeted achieving 70% circular textiles in the Metropolitan Region Amsterdam by 2030. Demonstrating the potential for impactful change, CIC is now dedicated to sharing its knowledge, experience, and strategies in an open-source manner.

#circularinnovationcollective #circularcities #ventures

Happy Thursday, all 🎈

👯While Playground 🛝 is busy building the product, we actively talk with architects, developers, and governments. One topic that keeps surfacing is that there isn’t a clear and simple framework for starting community engagement and even convincing internal stakeholders to embark on this adventure without knowing the associated costs and best practices.

For that reason, we are releasing the Playground Framework 🪄. With five simple clicks, you can generate an actionable strategy to help you navigate the complexities of making our cities more inclusive.

✨Play with the framework and share your thoughts with us. Link to public demo video 🔗

💌<strong>Our inbox is open;</strong> let’s build the future of our cities together. 🏙️🍃

Gebruik deze als kapstok voor uw strategie

De kracht van een integrale strategie die financiën, mens en milieu met elkaar in balans brengt. Duurzaamheid is de nieuwe norm. Veel organisaties hebben duurzaamheid reeds een plek gegeven in hun strategie. Maar hoe zorgt u dat u tot een integrale strategie en juiste verantwoording komt? De standaarden die de EU zet op het gebied van duurzaamheid, vanuit haar ambitie om de EU een duurzame regio te laten zijn in 2050, geven de mogelijkheid om als publieke instelling relevante duurzaamheidsthema’s te selecteren en prioriteren tot een integrale strategie en een heldere verantwoording. In aansluiting op de wensen en verwachtingen van alle stakeholders.

De meerwaarde van ESG voor uw organisatie

Onze maatschappij verlangt steeds sterker van organisaties dat zij hun financiële resultaten in balans brengen met hun sociale belangen en het milieu. In antwoord hierop heeft de EU de Green Deal vastgesteld, die de regio duurzaam moet maken op basis van vijf milieuthema’s (klimaat, vervuiling, water, biodiversiteit en circulariteit). Om daarop te kunnen sturen heeft de EU ook richtlijnen voor verslaggeving vastgesteld, de zogenoemde Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (hierna CSRD) vastgesteld. Uit deze richtlijn zijn de European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) voortgekomen. Deze standaarden bieden handvatten voor hoe een organisatie zich op het gebied van milieu (Environment), mens (Social) en bestuur (Governance) kan verantwoorden. 
De EU-standaarden bieden publieke organisaties de kapstok om duurzaamheid een integraal onderdeel te maken van de organisatiestrategie en voorop te (blijven) lopen in de beweging. De ESRS zijn weliswaar primair gericht op verslaggeving, maar bieden ook een mooi afwegingskader voor bestuurders en management bij het maken van strategische keuzes. Daarmee bereidt u zich voor op een toekomst waarin organisaties nadrukkelijker worden gevraagd om een positieve impact op mens, milieu en maatschappij te maken en waarin bepaalde duurzaamheidsontwikkelingen (zoals klimaatverandering) risico’s kunnen gaan vormen voor uw organisatie.

Welke verplichtingen gelden voor publieke instellingen?

Iedere publieke instelling krijgt naar verwachting te maken met eisen op het gebied van duurzaamheid en transparantie daarover. Hetzij omdat dit verplicht wordt in Nederlandse wetgeving, dan wel doordat uw stakeholders u om verantwoording gaan vragen. Zo zal bijvoorbeeld uw bank bij het verstrekken van financiering naar verwachting u bevragen over het effect van de verstrekte lening op mens, milieu en maatschappij. Een bank heeft namelijk de verplichting te rapporteren over de duurzaamheid van haar portefeuille.

"Het is zo goed als zeker dat publieke organisaties gevraagd gaan worden zich te verantwoorden over duurzaamheid"

De weg naar een integrale strategie en heldere ESG-rapportage

Onderstaande roadmap vertelt hoe u in 7 stappen tot een integrale strategie en verantwoording kan komen. Het vormgeven van een integrale strategie - waarin duurzaamheid een prominente plek inneemt - en u als organisatie hierover kunnen verantwoorden, is een proces dat niet alleen afstemming behoeft met de stakeholders, het vraagt ook om inbedding in alle processen van het bedrijf – en dat komt met de nodige inspanning en doorlooptijd. Wij adviseren u dan ook om hiermee tijdig aan de slag te gaan.

Essentieel is allereerst te bepalen wie hiervoor verantwoordelijk is binnen uw organisatie (stap 1). Om vervolgens te beoordelen op welke duurzaamheidselementen uw organisatie een significante impact heeft (stap 2). Wanneer sprake is van een significante impact noemen we dat ook wel ‘materiële impact’.

Hoe bepaalt u op welke onderdelen uw impact materieel is?

Welke duurzaamheidsthema’s relevant zijn, wordt bepaald door de aard van uw activiteiten, de behoeften van de belanghebbenden van uw organisatie op dit vlak én uw eigen ambitie en beleid.

Uw stakeholders, zowel intern als extern, kunnen belangrijke informatie geven in de materialiteitsanalyse over de duurzaamheidsthema’s waar uw organisatie het verschil maakt. Zij zijn echter niet allesbepalend. U kent zelf uw organisatie het beste en de aanwezige expertise binnen uw organisatie is ook zeker van belang om te bepalen waar de belangrijkste thema’s liggen. Uiteindelijk bepaalt u als management welke thema’s u zich op richt, op basis van de verkregen input en aangevuld met uw eigen strategische keuzes.

Een materialiteitsanalyse is tweeledig: u kijkt niet alleen naar de impact van de organisatie op de omgeving, maar ook naar de financiële impact van duurzaamheidsthema’s op de organisatie. Als u bijvoorbeeld denkt aan vervoersbewegingen - en daarmee samenhangende uitstoot - die uw dienstverlening teweegbrengt,  dan is niet alleen de vraag hoe groot de invloed van die uitstoot is op de omgeving, maar ook wat er gaat veranderen door bijvoorbeeld regelgeving. Komt er bijvoorbeeld regelgeving die uitstootreductie verplicht en betekent dat dat elektrisch vervoer de standaard wordt? Dan kan dat belangrijke financiële impact hebben op de waarde en levensduur van uw huidige vervoersmiddelen.  

"Met input van uw stakeholders en experts bepaalt u in een materialiteitsanalyse de duurzaamheidsthema’s waar uw organisatie het verschil maakt."

In een volgende publicatie zullen we dieper ingaan op stappen 3 t/m 7.

Evenementen in de stad willen we verder verduurzamen en toegankelijker maken. Vaak vinden evenementen plaats op centrale plekken waar mensen bij elkaar komen en waar veel afval, drinkwater en consumptievoorzieningen zijn. Dit zijn goede plekken om nieuwe innovaties te testen en verder te ontwikkelen. Tot 29 februari kunnen ondernemers zich inschrijven om hun innovatie te testen via het In Residence programma Open Evenementen.

In Residence programma

Innovatieve ondernemers kunnen zich inschrijven voor het In Residence programma van het stedelijk innovatieteam, waarin open evenementen in Amsterdam worden ingezet voor het testen van innovaties. Het doel van dit programma is om kennis te ontwikkelen voor zowel het verduurzamen van evenementen, als voor het vinden van praktische oplossingen voor een toekomstbestendige stad.

Geselecteerde ondernemers krijgen daarbij professionele begeleiding bij het verder ontwikkelen van hun innovatie en de mogelijkheid samen te werken met ambtenaren en evenementenorganisatoren. Voor het testen van hun innovatie krijgen ondernemers een budget tot €15.000,- toegewezen. Het programma duurt 6 maanden, van mei tot en met oktober 2024. Op 26 april worden de 8 ondernemers bekend gemaakt die dit jaar aan het programma mee zullen doen.

Het In Residence programma Open Evenementen vindt plaats in aanloop naar het jubileumjaar 2025 – het jaar van Amsterdam 750 en SAIL – dat groots gevierd zal worden in de hele stad. Innovaties die de komende tijd op evenementen worden getest en door ontwikkeld kunnen mogelijk een rol hebben tijdens de grootschalige evenementen die dat jaar plaatsvinden.

Evenementen als proeftuin

Meerdere grote evenementen nemen deel aan het programma. De organisaties van onder andere Pride en de Marathon bieden geselecteerde ondernemers mogelijkheden om innovaties op thema’s als duurzaamheid, circulair, mobiliteit, inclusie en toegankelijkheid te testen tijdens deze evenementen. Kansrijke innovaties krijgen hierdoor de mogelijkheid om door te ontwikkelen en een positieve bijdrage te leveren aan de opgaven van de stad.

Innovatieve ondernemers kunnen innovaties opgeven binnen de volgende thema's:

• Voedsel
• Circulaire materialen
• Circulaire verpakkingen
• Mobiliteit
• Inclusiviteit en toegankelijkheid
• Extreem weer
• Digitale veiligheid

Er is ook een wildcard voor een kansrijke innovatie die buiten deze categorieën valt.

De Inschrijving verloopt via: https://innovatiepartners.nl/project/open-evenementen-2024/ en sluit op 29 februari.

Meer informatie over hoe wij samenwerken met ondernemers vind je op:www.innovatiepartners.nl. Op 6 en 8 februari vinden er twee informatiewebinars plaats waarin meer verteld zal worden over het In Residence programma en de selectieprocedure. Ook is er dan ruimte om vragen te stellen.

A certain degree of compactness is essential for the viability of 15-minute cities.  This is due to the need for an economic threshold for facilities accessible by walking or cycling. A summary of 300 research projects by the OECD shows that compactness increases the efficiency of public services in all respects. But it also reveals disadvantages in terms of health and well-being due to pollution, traffic, and noise. The assumption is that there is an optimal density at which both pleasant living and the presence of everyday facilities - including schools - can be realised.  At this point, 'densification' is not at the expense of quality of life but contributes to it.  A lower density results in more car use and a higher density will reduce living and green space and the opportunity to create jobs.

The image above is a sketch of the 'Plan Papenvest' in Brussels. The density, 300 dwellings on an area of 1.13 hectares, is ten times that of an average neighbourhood. Urban planners often mention that the density of Dutch cities is much lower than in Paris and Barcelona, for example. Yet it is precisely in these cities that traffic is one of the main causes of air pollution, stress, and health problems. The benefits of compactness combined with a high quality of life can only be realised if the nuisances associated with increasing density are limited. This uncompromisingly means limiting car ownership and use.

Urban planners often seem to argue the other way round. They argue that building in the green areas around cities must be prevented at all costs to protect nature and that there is still enough space for building in the cities. The validity of this view is limited. In the first place, the scarce open space within cities can be better used for clean workshops and nature development in combination with water control. Secondly, much of the 'green' space outside cities is not valuable nature at all. Most of it is used to produce feed for livestock, especially cows. Using a few per cent of this space for housing does not harm nature at all. This housing must be concentrated near public transport. The worst idea is to add a road to the outskirts of every town and village. This will undoubtedly increase the use of cars.
 
Below you can link to my free downloadable e-book: 25 Building blocks to create better streets, neighborhoods and cities

In the big tech-dominated era, data has been commercially exploited for so long that it is now hard to imagine that data sharing might also benefit the community. Yet that is what a collective of businesses, governments, social institutions and residents in Amsterdam aim to do. Sharing more data to better care for the city. On behalf of the Data Commons Collective, Lia Hsu (Strategic Advisor at Amsterdam Economic Board) asked the Amsterdam Smart City network for input and feedback on their Data Commons initiative on the last Demoday of 2023.

What is a (data) common?

Commons are natural resources that are accessible to everyone within a community. Water. Fertile soil. Clean air. Actually everything the earth has given us. We as humanity have increasingly begun to exploit these commons in our pursuit of power and profit maximisation. As a result, we risk exhausting them.

Data is a new, digital resource: a valuable commodity that can be used to improve products and services. Data can thus also be used for the common good. However there are two important differences between a common and a data common: data in commons never runs out, and data in commons is not tied to any geographical location or sociocultural groups.

Four principles for Data Commons

The Data Commons collective is currently working on different applied use cases to understand how data commons can help with concrete solutions to pressing societal problems in the areas of energy, green urban development, mobility, health and culture. Each data commons serves a different purpose and requires a different implementation, but there are four principles that are always the same:

1. The data common is used to serve a public or community purpose
2. The data common requires cooperation between different parties, such as individuals, companies or public institutions
3. The data common is managed according to principles that are acceptable to users and that define who may access the data commons under what conditions, in what ways they may be used, for what purpose, what is meant by data misuse
4. The data common is embedded to manage data quality, but also to monitor compliance with the principles and ensure that data misuse is also noticed and that an appropriate response (such as a reprimand, penalty or fine) follows.

The Data Commons Collective is now in the process of developing a framework, which provides a self-assessment tool to guide the formation of Data Commons initiatives by triggering consideration of relevant aspects for creating a data commons. It is a means of reflection, rather than prescription, to encourage sustainable and responsible data initiatives.

Energy Data Commons case and Value Workshop by Waag

After the introduction to the Data Commons Collective and Framework by Simone van der Burg (Waag) and Roos de Jong (Deloitte), the participants engaged in a value workshop led by Simone. The case we worked with: we’re dealing with a shortage of affordable and clean energy. Congestion issues are only expected to get worse, due to increased energy use by households en businesses. An energy Data Commons in neighbourhoods can have certain benefits. Such as preventing congestion issues, using clean energy sources more effectively, becoming self-sufficient as a neighbourhood and reducing costs. But under what circumstances would we want to share our energy data with our neighbours? What are the values that we find important when it comes to sharing our energy data?

Results: Which values are important when sharing our energy data?

In smaller groups, the participants discussed which values they found important for an energy data common using a value card deck from Waag. Some values that were mentioned were:

• Trustworthiness: It is important to trust one another when sharing our energy data. It helps when we assume that everyone that is part of the common has the right intentions.
• Fun: The energy Data Commons should be fun and positive! The participants discussed gamification and rewards as part of the common.
• Knowledge: One of the goals of sharing data with each other is to gain more knowledge about energy consumption and saving.
• Justice and solidarity: If everyone in the common feels safe and acknowledged, it will benefit the outcome. Everyone in the common should be treated equally.
• Inclusion and Community-feeling: It is important that people feel involved in the project. The Data Commons should improve our lives, make it more sustainable but also progress our social relations.

During this Demoday, we got to know the Data Commons collective and experienced which values we find important when sharing our data with others. Amsterdam Economic Board will remain involved in the Data Commons Collective in a coordinating role and work on use cases to understand how data commons can work for society.

Would you like to know more about the Data Commons Collective or do you have any input for them? Please feel free to reach out to me via sophie@amsterdamsmartcity.com or leave a comment below.

On Thursday December 14th, Amsterdam Smart City partners concluded 2023 with an afternoon full of inspiration, exchange and connections at our 22nd Demoday! Our partner Deloitte welcomed our network in The Garage, where their ‘Deloitte Studios’ department is located. In this article, we’ll give you a quick overview of the Knowledge Session, Work Sessions and Pitches. Interesting in learning more? Read the full reports by our Programme Managers Noor, Pelle and Sophie (linked below).

About our Demodays

The Demodays are one of the tools we use to stimulate innovation and encourage connection between our partners and community. The purpose of the Demodays is to present the progress of various innovation projects, ask for help, share dilemmas and involve more partners to take these projects to the next level. More information about the Demodays can be found here.

Knowledge Session: Change in the here and now, with Theory U

To kick-off our final Demoday of 2023, our brand-new partner Hieroo led an inspiring knowledge session about the change method they use for social innovation in the city: Theory U. Dorien Schneider and Maartje Krijnen taught us more about this methodology and how it can help us solve complex problems by shifting from ego to eco-thinking. Read the full report here.

Work sessions

After the plenary Knowledge Session we split up in different worksessions, each exploring regional innovation challenges. As always, we had set up the sessions’ topics and moderation in collaboration with our partners.

Mobility | Decision-making along the principles of Inclusive Prosperity – Jurhan Kwee (Municipality of Amsterdam)
In The Netherlands, the concept of ‘Inclusive Prosperity’ is on the rise. Policy makers are busy defining this concept, figuring out how to put this concept into practice and what it means for their decision-making process. Together with his colleagues at the Municipality of Amsterdam, Yurhan Kwee hosts sessions on decision-making along the principles of Inclusive Prosperity. With the input he gathers, he hopes to make the decisions needed for our Inclusive Prosperity ambitions more understandable and transparent, both for Amsterdam’s administrators and councillors as well as its citizens. Read Pelle’s recap article here.

Digital | Data Commons Collective: Using data for a liveable city – Lia Hsu (Amsterdam Economic Board) and Simone van der Burg (Waag)
In the big tech-dominated era, data has been commercially exploited for so long that it is now hard to imagine that data sharing might also benefit the community. Yet that is what a collective of businesses, governments, social institutions and residents in Amsterdam aim to do. Sharing more data to better care for the city. On behalf of the Data Commons Collective, Lia Hsu (Strategic Advisor at Amsterdam Economic Board) asked the Amsterdam Smart City network for input and feedback on their Data Commons initiative. Read Sophie's recap article here.

Energy | How can we continue to facilitate the homeowner in driving the energy transition? | Wouter van Rooijen (Alliander)
Wouter van Rooijen (Alliander) discussed the challenges related to grid congestion. From 2030 onwards, it is expected that a significant portion of the low-voltage network will experience both over- and under-voltage. While the network will be reinforced as quickly as possible, the lack of labour capacity is also prompting the consideration of alternative solutions.

The solution that emerged from Wouter's co-creation process was WijkWise. In this work session, Wouter aimed to validate the WijkWise concept and find parties that could contribute to its development and market implementation. Dave van Loon from Kennisland moderated the session. Read Noor’s recap article here.

Circular | Navigating eco-emotions: The impact of working in sustainability on your mental wellbeing| Marian Zandbergen (Hogeschool van Amsterdam)
This work session, led by Marian Zandbergen (CIRCOLLAB, HvA) and moderated by Mareille de Bloois (Royal HaskoningDHV), explored the challenges and opportunities associated with eco-emotions, both personally and within organizations. The key question addressed was: How can individuals and organisations constructively manage eco-emotions, and what implications does this have for organisations? Read Noor’s recap article here.

Pitches

To end this festive afternoon and the year 2023 as a whole, we invited project owners and -members to present their progress and next steps on topics brought in during our events and deep-dives throughout 2023. The following projects were presented. You can read more about these topics on their dedicated articles and project pages, linked below.

Local Energy Systems: Where we started, what we have achieved, and what are the next steps – Omar Shafqat (University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam)

Connecting the resource- and energy transition – Edwin Oskam (MRA)

ChatGPT and the government: Possibilities and impact on our work – Jeroen Silvis (Province of North Holland)

Floating urban districts: Future-proof living in the Metropolitan Region – Joke Dufourmont (AMS Institute)

Mobility Justice: Raising the topic of Mobility Poverty and the working group’s progress – Bas Gerbrandy (Province of North Holland)

Our next Demoday will take place in April. Do you have an inspiring story or project you want to pitch to the Amsterdam Smart City network? Let us know via sophie@amsterdamsmartcity.com

*This article makes use of the term Inclusive Prosperity as the English translation for the Dutch word; ‘Brede Welvaart’

In The Netherlands, the concept of Inclusive Prosperity* is on the rise. Policy makers are busy defining this concept, figuring out how to put this concept into practice and what it means for their decision-making process. Together with his colleagues at the Municipality of Amsterdam, Yurhan Kwee hosts sessions on decision-making along the principles of Inclusive Prosperity. With the input he gathers, he hopes to make the decisions needed for our Inclusive Prosperity ambitions more understandable and transparent, both for Amsterdam’s administrators and councillors as well as its citizens.

Inclusive Prosperity

Inclusive Prosperity is about more than just money. It involves everything that people consider valuable, such as health, the quality of education, the environment, a safe living environment, and equal opportunities for everyone. It's about the quality of life in the present, and the extent to which this affects the prosperity of future generations or those of people elsewhere in the world.

According to the definition, used by the Municipality, there are 8 themes to consider:

1. Subjective Well-being

Subjective well-being refers to the evaluation people make of their lives. Consider the question, "How satisfied are you with life in general?"

2. Health

The theme of Health encompasses physical illnesses and conditions, as well as mental health, living with limitations, perceived health, and self-regulation and resilience.

3. Consumption and Income

The theme of Consumption and Income refers to how income provides people with the freedom and opportunities to consume, including purchasing services and goods, maintaining a financial buffer, and shaping one's lifestyle.

4. Education and Training

Thinking about the theme of Education and Training involves the transfer of knowledge and skills, socialization, and considering the education or training experiences of individuals.

5. Spatial Quality and Cohesion

Regarding the theme of Spatial Cohesion and Quality, consider the following: a qualitatively well-designed space is a crucial precondition for the perceived broad prosperity. This includes spatial design on a functional level and with a focus on the future.

6. Economic Capital

Depending on the case, consider how it relates to:

• Human capital: the combination of competencies, knowledge, and skills;
• Physical capital: material possessions, such as machinery, buildings, and infrastructure;
• Knowledge capital: intangible assets, such as research and development, data, and patents;
• Financial capital: the financial resources of households and the government (purchasing power).

7. Natural Capital

Natural Capital refers to the stock of natural resources. Consider items such as (drinking) water, food, minerals, wind-sun-water energy, biodiversity, etc. Assess whether they are sufficiently available, in shortage, or if there is damage to these resources.

8. Social Capital

The concept of Social Capital often refers to the benefits of social networks, such as access to information and resources. This involves connections within and between groups. Positive effects can lead to trust, while negative effects can lead to loneliness.

Experimenting (with Mobility related policies) in public space

The case we used during this session is the use of experiments in public space, altering mobility or travel infrastructure. The months leading up to this afternoon, Amsterdam had put different experiments into practice (e.g. de ‘knip’ and de ‘paaltjesproef’) resulting in heated discussions, about both the success and desirability of using this method.

In a more objective manner, we used the Broad Prosperity principles to argue why its either desirable or undesirable to put such methods into practice.

Results

The group agreed that these Amsterdam experiments, concerned with creating calmer, more liveable urban areas, score well within themes like; Health (less air & noise pollution), Nature (more space for green and biodiversity), Social capital (more space and opportunity to meet and interact), Spacial quality (less dangerous and more moving space) and education (experimenting, learning by doing, viewing urban planning as experimenting and an ongoing learning process). However, as this year’s backlash on the experiments showed, there are some negative aspects to consider. Examples of domains in which we found some negative aspects, were; Economy (decreased speed and efficiency), Consumption & Income (local shop- and restaurant-owners need to be flexible and could be victims of changing infrastructure) and Subjective Well-being (citizens feel used, disadvantaged, and there is ambiguity about the purpose).

We found it difficult to arrive at a common answer because advantages and disadvantages exist on each theme separately. However, there was a common notion that the success of this method is rooted in clear and transparent communication on the effects and goals of such experiment. Frustration should be minimized and the opposing arguments should be taken seriously. Furthermore, we discussed the difference between a ‘real’ experiment in which every outcome is a success, and a trial, which is used to test a policy that’s envisioned for future years. The one who initiates the experiment should have this very clear for itself.

While one of the strengths of this method is the need to value these different domains in a more equal and objective manner, it proved to be difficult in practice. We all had the tendency to give some aspects more weight than others. While we were supposed to set up an advice and practice with decision-making along the principles of Inclusive Prosperity, it turned out to be challenging to let go of our prior experience, prejudices and opinions on this subject. We weren’t sure whether this is always a negative thing, but it’s one of the considerations Yurhan took home in the Municipality’s exploration of this approach.

Together, we experienced the challenge of working together with a new concept and approach. It should be an ongoing practice and discussion, a collective effort. Sessions like these serve that purpose perfectly.

Feel free to get in touch with me if you want to know more about the municipality’s and Amsterdam Economic Board’s efforts on the topic of Inclusive Prosperity.

Carlos Moreno, a professor at the Sorbonne University, helped Mayor Anne Hidalgo develop the idea of the 15-minute city. He said that six things made people happy: living, working, amenities, education, wellbeing, and recreation. The quality of the urban environment is enhanced when these functions are realized near each other. The monofunctional expansion of cities in the US, but also in the bidonvilles of Paris, is a thorn in his side, partly because this justifies owning a car.
 
A more precise definition of the concept of the 15-minute city is needed before it can be implemented on a large scale. It is important to clarify which means of transport must be available to reach certain facilities in a given number of minutes. The list of facilities is usually very comprehensive, while the list of means of transport is usually only vaguely defined. But the distance you can travel in 15 minutes depends on the availability of certain modes of transport (see figure above).
Advocates of "new urbanism" have developed the tools to design 15-minute cities. They are based on three zones: the 5-minute walking zone, the 15-minute walking zone, which coincides with the 5-minute cycling zone, and finally the 15-minute cycling zone. These are not static concepts: In practice, the zones overlap and complement each other.

The 5-minute walking zone

This zone corresponds to the way in which most residential neighbourhoods functioned up until the 1960s, wherever you are in the world. Imagine a space with an average distance from the center to the edge of about 400 meters. In the center you will find a limited number of shops, a (small) supermarket, one or more cafes and a restaurant. The number of residents will vary between two and three thousand. Density will decrease from the centre and the main streets outwards. Green spaces, including a small neighbourhood park, will be distributed throughout the neighbourhood, as will workshops and offices.
In the case of new construction, it is essential that pedestrian areas have a dense network of paths without crossings at ground level with streets where car traffic is allowed. Some paths are wider and allow cycling within the 5- and 15-minute cycle zones. The streets provide access to concentrated parking facilities.

The 5-minute cycle zone and the 15-minute walking zone.

Here the distance from the center to the edge is about one kilometer. In this area, most of the facilities that residents need is available and can be distributed around the centers of the 5-minute walking zones. For example, a slightly larger supermarket may be located between two 5-minute walking zones. This zone will also contain one or more larger parks and some larger concentrations of employment.
This zone can be a large district of a city, but it can also be a small municipality or district of around 15 to 25,000 inhabitants. With such a population there will be little room for dogmatic design, especially when it comes to existing buildings. But even then, it is possible to separate traffic types by keeping cars off many streets and clustering car parks. The bottom line is that all destinations in this zone can be reached quickly by walking and cycling, and that car routes can be crossed safely.
The car will be used (occasionally) for several destinations. For example, for large shopping trips to the supermarket.

The 15-minute cycle zone.

This zone will be home to 100.00 or more residents. The large variation is due to the (accidental) presence of facilities for a larger catchment area, such as an industrial estate, a furniture boulevard or an IKEA, a university or a (regional) hospital. It is certainly not a sum of comparable 5-minute cycle zones. Nevertheless, the aim is to distribute functions over the whole area on as small a scale as possible. In practice, this zone is also crossed by several roads for car traffic. The network of cycle paths provides the most direct links between the 5-minute cycle zones and the wider area.
 
The main urban development objectives for this zone are good accessibility to urban facilities by public transport from all neighbourhoods, the prohibition of hypermarkets and a certain distribution of central functions throughout the area: Residents should be able to go out and have fun in a few places and not just in a central part of the city.
 
Below you can link to my free downloadable e-book: 25 Building blocks to create better streets, neighborhoods and cities.