Observatory of ideas

Solidary, Creative Economy, for Communities and With Communities!
Thousands of other initiatives around the world!

(Ana Luíza Farage Silva)

At some point people realized that they needed each other to do something other than "subsist". From there, they decided to organize themselves in something called communities in order to improve their lives and practice a good "survival". Over time, they realized that the law of the strongest could hurt and decided to affirm social contracts to live together and in harmony.

Some people understood that they should give up some freedoms for this, others did not. Over time, these communities have been forming their stories, generating their identities and dynamizing their cultures. When communities became organized, they started to be called societies.

How many societies do we know? How many societies do we live in? Within these social contracts, many have little and few have a lot. Much what? Wealth? Yes, few have access! Access to quality education, decent health, respectful housing, nutritious food and so on.

How many can do what they want and how many cannot do what they need? It is in this concern that I perceive (as several others have already noted) that everything tends to come together. The better structured places attract bigger investments that generate bigger chains that attract even more investments and keep developing (or just growing) more and more. The point is that where there is little, little remains.

Does it have to be this way? If you were a government official and were going to choose to develop a state, would you give growth incentives to regions that are already more advanced or encourage the development of those that still have almost nothing? The prudent answer may be: "it depends" ... if you just want to develop faster, it may be easier to encourage the growth of the wealthiest regions.

After all, their chain is greater and they can “pull” other cities in the process of growth. But if you think about it on the other hand, you can see that there is no certainty that the poorest cities will be fostered by the richest. Will the access ever get there? With this in mind, several concepts and practices have been developed. Have you ever heard of Creative Economy? Basically, knowledge, creativity and intellectual capital are the production factors of this economy.

In this process, cultural production is used as a historical factor in the formation of identity and income generation in that community. In other words, a new look at the solution of the structural problems of society, the economy and culture are sought from the identity of that population.

In other words, development is sought from the convergence and respect for the roots of that people's history with cultural, social and economic objectives. Discussions, initiatives and studies have been taking place throughout Brazil with the aim of expanding this concept: the first International Forum of Creative Cities in Rio Quente took place in September 2013 http://rioquente.go.gov.br/cidades-criativas/, the IV Minas Gerais Meeting of Public Administration, Solidarity Economy and Social Management (IV EMAPEGS) addressed this theme in Viçosa this year http://www.emapegs.ufv.br/ and so on.

In addition, another concept has been addressed, created and practiced. Have you heard of Solidarity Economy? The concept of solidarity started to be guided at the end of the 18th century, but it has not yet been completely assimilated to the market. In this context, solidarity economy means interdependence and is based on the principles of cooperation, self-management and brings an economic dimension to society. In other words, we think of a market geared towards people, not people geared towards the market.

Despite the various difficulties faced by the Solidarity Economy, such as mapping, production flow, obtaining credit, advice and collective work, many advances and initiatives have taken place in Brazil. Have you heard of the Center for Solidarity Economy of Tocantis? UFT's NESOL? They have been working hard on this process: http://www.fapto.uft.edu.br/conhecimento/index.php/uft/14-nucleo-de-economia-solidaria-da-uft-nesol. Many communities have also realized that they live on the job, but remain in poverty. So they decided to challenge all the pre-established and create social currencies. That is, they realized that they had to develop some way to encourage the money to circulate more within the community itself, with the possibility of exchanging it for the real. Some initiatives have been implemented in Brazil. The first was Banco Palmas, at the Palmeiras complex in Fortaleza (CE). http://www.bancopalmas.org.br/oktiva.net/1235/nota/12291. Today there are more than 110 community banks, a chain, across Brazil. Several other initiatives in the world have been taken, but it is clear that challenges abound.

Comments

Topics

Maybe you will also like these updates

Herman van den Bosch, professor in management development , posted Apr 22nd

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

AMS Institute, Re-inventing the city (urban innovation) at AMS Institute, posted Apr 16th

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.

Rihards Dzelme, Inclusive Cities & AI / Trained Architect and Urbanist , posted Apr 15th

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! 😀