COST Action TU1204 People Friendly Cities in a Data Rich World

Glasgow Early Stage Researchers Symposium 2.00 to 5.00 pm 23th March 2015

Citizens as Co-Researchers

Helga Ögmundardóttir University of Iceland, Iceland

From Hearings and Societal Outreach to Ethnography for Action. Mainstreaming creative community change in a techno-planning world

Carolina Vasilikou, Aisling Joyce, Teresa Tourvas, Giulia Vallone ,and Laura Pirrone

University of Kent, University of Limerick, University of Cyprus, Cork County Council

Civic Self-Organisation: lessons from the city of Lucca

Aisling Joyce, Carolina Vasilikou, Teresa Tourvas, Giulia Vallone , and Laura Pirrone

University of Limerick, University of Kent,

University of Cyprus, Cork County Council

Citizens as co-researchers in Oslo 24Hr Citizen Focussed Design Challenge

Chiara Certoma, Filippo Corsini and Francesco Rizzi Scoula Superiore Sant’Ana, Italy

Crowd-sourcing urban sustainability. Data, people and technologies in participatory governance

Urban Living Labs

Giulia Mellis.

SiTI Istituto Superiore sui Sistemi Territoriali per l'Innovazione, Torino, Italy

Urban Living Labs: learning from practice

Lorena Pocatila The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania

Big Data an opportunity for friendly cities

Jurate Sliogeriene Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Lithuania

The significance of public-social aspects solving urban infrastructure development tasks

Chiara Pellegrini, Scoula Superiore Sant’Ana, Italy

Comparing Theory & Practice in Social Finance - Impact Measurement in Ireland'

Qualitative research, such as has long been practiced by anthropologists and many other so-cial scientists, is based on close interaction between researcher and the ones researched. Not only that; it is based on trust, mutual interest in sharing information, ideas and values, con-scious consent and general interest in the human condition, locally experienced and ex-pressed, but understood and evaluated in a wider context, even a global one. That said, it has of course gone through historical changes as the methods of all other disciplines, even trans-formation, not least since the middle of last century, when the innocence of the grand enter-prise of human progress and development was revealed as wrought with power-struggles, in-terest agendas and other not-so-noble processes and forces.

With a changing view of what society is about and where they are going with their research, anthropologists and other social scientists realised that their methods, theories, and not least, products in the form of texts had to be re-evaluated and their potential uses and abuses ac-knowledged. One could at least try to prevent the negative effects of one’s research-findings, on the marginalised and powerless, by starting out with a transparent agenda, laid out for the subjects of the research to judge, if they wanted to be in or not, and what they would gain out of it, if anything at all. Empowerment and agency became buzzwords and the researcher was to do the science as much for the natives’ enhancement as his or her own career. Critical the-ory and later postmodernism took over the stage from positivism and interpretive social sci-ence in social scientific research, not least with the aid of feminist theory and other ap-proaches, critical of research being just one more layer of oppression from the colonial establishment, patriarchy and ruling classes.

Ethnography for action or whatever else potentially empowering social research is called; ac-tion research, co-research, etc., belongs to a wide scale of methodological approaches where one is always conscious of the potential uses and effects of one’s findings, where research in the form of fieldwork is itself a transformative process, and where one of the premises of the enterprise itself is to remember that knowledge is never value-free but a historically produced and situational tool for whoever to use. So, if one wants to make a change, one can very well begin by lending a hand in communities where change is needed, in a way that the inhabitants will benefit the most. I have been involved in several research projects through the years which have been more or less empowering for the people under scrutiny, at least personally or even on a bigger scale, and I have increasingly realised that even if it is only as a listener, re-corder, story-teller, companion, visitor with an open mind, I can be and have been a force of

Ethnography for action – can we go from planning by external specialists to co-creating our communities? Experience from anthropology and ethnographic fieldwork.

Helga Ögmundardóttir University of Iceland, Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, Reykjavík, Iceland

helgaog@hi.is

ABSTRACT:

change in “my” communities. For me, it is a natural and easy step to a full-fledged action-ethnographer, from an “ordinary” social scientist lurking behind in people’s kitchens, sheep-stalls, meetings, festivities or other social settings, because I’m always a participant anyway and never a neutral or invisible piece of furniture. I have agency and as a researcher financed by official funds, I don’t only can but have an obligation to participate in necessary changes, having a unique opportunity as a social scientist to facilitate, empower, engage, involve, guide or be any kind of agent in the contexts where communities are changed.

In my talk I will give examples from my fieldwork experience of what and how I envision what I call “from hearings and societal outreach to ethnography for action” referring to the process of citizen involvement going from partial and pre-scribed participation to full-fledged and power-balanced cooperation of all concerning and concerned groups in a community

Civic Self-Organisation and Public Engagement in Urban Planning: lessons from the City of Lucca

Carolina Vasilikou University of Kent, School of Architecture, Canterbury, UK Carol.Vasilikou@gmail.com

Aisling Joyce, Teresa Tourvas, Giulia Vallone, Laura Pirrone University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus, Cork County Council, Cork, Ireland

ABSTRACT: Public participation in the urban planning of cities is a growing field of research interest and European urban policy. The increasing need for more direct and transparent forms of governance has led to the self-organisation of citizens’ groups and associations, in an effort to have their voice heard in the decision-making process of spatial and planning development. In this context, this paper analyses the ongoing public engagement process in the reference city of Lucca, part of the EU COST Action project People Friendly Cities in a Data Rich World, with the aim to initiate a body of city stakeholders organized to co-research, -create and -design the urban development of the city. The formation of a City Sounding Board is supported by a research plan to be carried out in a European network of reference cities, investigating the alignment of the ‘’hardware’’ and ‘’software’’ of a city with user needs. This people-centred consultation framework places the citizen as a co-researcher in the promotion of well-being, the sustainable use of resources and the economic, cultural and social development of the city.

Primary fieldwork was carried out in September 2014 in the walled city of Lucca, in Italy. The main research objective was to identify and evaluate past practices of public engagement and propose ways of implementation of a new body of enhanced citizen-focused participation in urban planning. Structured around evidence-based research processes, including field based consultation, interviews with stakeholders and self-organised citizens groups, experiential observations, citizen surveys and spatial analysis, the fieldwork made apparent a strong presence of citizens-led associations and self-organised groups that aspired different levels of engagement with planning decisions in the greater area of the city.

Main results of the research indicate a territorial fragmentation of the greater city of Lucca that governs the scale and point-by-point engagement of citizens in urban planning issues. This spatial fragmentation becomes also evident in the lack of cross communication and collaboration between the different infrastructures of the city. In this context, the City Sounding Board manifests itself as a body of facilitation in bringing together the main city stakeholders through the use of appropriate tools for co-research and data collection that may actively include self-organisation processes to inform the decision-making at city level. Its main function is the setting of a framework where initiatives and values of public participation are clearly defined around transparency, independency and engagement. The CSB takes the role of a table, on which all issues of spatial transformation and development are placed. The collection of a wide range of information representing the various stakeholders at large begins to formulate a mosaic of opportunities for collaborative decision-making. The creation of a shared platform where trust can be built, voices can be heard and transdisciplinary collaboration between all stakeholders can take place, promotes the potential of engaged and creative citizen participation in urban planning.

References Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders & George Simons (2009). A Social Vision for Value Co-creation in De-sign. Open Source Business Resource, December 2009: Value Co-Creation. Horelli L. ed. (2013). New Approaches to Urban Planning Insights from Participatory Communi-ties. Aalto University Publication series. Pallot M. & Pawar K. (2012). A Holistic Model of User Experience for Living Lab Experiential Design. In: Proceedings of the18th International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE). Germany: Munich. Vasilikou C., Tourvas T., Pirrone L., Vallone G. & Joyce A. (2014). Lucca CIty Sounding Board: towards engaging long-term public participation in the urban planning of Lucca. Report for-mally submitted for the COST Action TU1204- People-Friendly Cities in a Data Rich World (Co-ord: Prof. Mark Dyer)

Inclusive design is an important aspect in designing an environment that can be experienced by everyone, regardless of age, ability, gender and social and ethnic background. In order to design for citizens we must include and consult citizens in the design process. Many profes-sionals, including myself as a graduate architect, have worked on trans-disciplinary teams of architects, engineers, communities, behavioral change experts, geographers and others. How-ever, in order to design inclusively we must understand the importance of a multi-user ap-proach for a product, environment or service that can be experienced by all. In September 2014, people were invited to participate in a 24 Hour Citizen-Focused Design Challenge at the Norwegian Center for Design and Architecture. The invitation was open to all with a shared interest in designing for an inclusive society. The challenge was for 5 teams of 8 persons to work together to consider an innovative design solution that would address "Peo-ple-Friendly Cities in a Data Rich World". How can inclusive design promote and support a citi-zen focus in the digital world when developing solutions for the urban environment? Each team was to present their design solution, 24 hours later in a 6 minute presentation. More importantly, the inspiration for this design was to be generated from the first-hand experi-ences the team had through their "lead user". Each Challenge teams comprised of a lead user; (citizens with some form of disability) and persons representing various disciplines, experiences, gender and age, from various back-grounds; academic, design, healthcare, social studies. While each member brought valuable and useful experiences and ideas to the the team, the most inspiring member in terms of un-derstanding challenges and generating a solution came through the lead user. The first few hours of the Design Challenge spent with our lead user, proved invaluable. In order to under-stand someone's disability required experiencing the environment through their perspective. This challenge demonstrated that in order to understand and suitably assess our urban envi-ronment, it is important to experience it from other citizens' perspectives. Certain design fea-tures for some can easily become challenges, obstacles and barriers for others. In this way we can re-imagine our urban environments as a lasting and universally accessible entity for all of its users.

Oslo's 24 Hr Citizen Focused Design Challenge as a vehicle for citizens acting as co-researchers. Aisling Joyce

University of Limerick, School of Architecture, Limerick, Ireland

aislingjoyce@gmail.com

Teresa Tourvas, Laura Pirrone, Giulia Vallone, Carolina Vasilikou

University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus, Cork County Council, Cork, Ireland

ABSTRACT:

The aim of this paper is to prefigure the future of urban sustainability governance by imple-menting crowdsourcing-based solutions for governance processes. This is done by reviewing the literature in order to acquire important evidence to support the inductive process of the-ory building, and to highlight the upcoming trends in participatory research and policy-making that exploit ICT and Web 2.0 social software. While crowdsourcing was originally defined as a web based business model requiring volun-tary open collaboration in the development of creative solutions, it is now generally under-stood in the both scientific and grey literature as an online distributed innovation process that mobilises a number of dedicated tools for significant results also in public research and gov-ernance, too. We argue that interest in crowdsourcing has expanded from computing re-searches to social and environmental applications. This new practical dimension unlocks the futures of integration of crowdsourcing into best practices in the governance of sustainability in an urban context. It can thus be key in addressing challenging urban sustainability issues (such as energy consumption, transport efficiency, deprivation and unequal access to re-sources, water and sanitation, sewage, and the availability and distribution of environmental services). Our analysis indicates that a transformative relationship between data and people creates new forms of distant search for solutions and decision making. On the basis of these results, significant contributions are further analysed in order to highlight the most promising trends. These include (1) the (often non-trivial) definition of urban sustainability and its metrics; (2) the relation between participatory processes, enabled by social web and interactive ICTs, and governance processes; and (3) the increase, definition and forthcoming development of crowdsourcing tools and processes. Building on evidence that implementing crowdsourcing into the forthcoming governance of urban sustainability is increasingly recognised as a common priority, the paper suggests policy makers to devote more resources to:

I. “openness”: encouraging the extension of open access data, as suggested by the

European Commission endorsement to open up public sector data for re-use across Europe (on the basis of recent evidence, this will become increasingly common in the near future) ;

II. “transparency”: extending crowdsourcing platforms by fostering the transpar-ency obtained through this flow of information;

III. “interoperability”: integrating crowdsourced data with open government data;

Crowdsourcing urban sustainability. Data, people and technologies in participatory governance.

Chiara Certomà Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Institute of Management, Pisa, Italy c.certoma@sssup.it

Filippo Corsini Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Institute of Management, Pisa, Italy f.corsini@sssup.it

Francesco Rizzi Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Institute of Management, Pisa, Italy f.rizzi@sssup.it

ABSTRACT:

IV. “adaptability”: preventing technological and infrastructural lock-ins that could give rise to new hidden monopolies.

Urban Living Labs: learning from practice Giulia Melis SiTI Istituto Superiore sui Sistemi Territoriali per l'Innovazione, Torino, Italy giulia.melis@siti.polito.it

Martijn de Waal Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands b.g.m.de.waal@hva.nl

ABSTRACT: During recent years, the fast development of Information Technologies (IT) and digital media has introduced new opportunities for a sustainable and inclusive growth of cities, by produc-ing on the one hand lots of data about urban life, and on the other hand, digital media plat-forms. The concept of planning itself is undergoing a cultural transformation, from designing the physical urban environment as an efficient, static backdrop for inhabitation, towards the con-cept of “citymaking”, where the spatial decision making process is dealing with cultural as-pects, liveability, community building, social cohesion and design. Over the last few years a new methodology called ‘Living Lab’ has emerged to involve citizens in the design process. Initially is has mainly been used in the business sector to test commer-cial products, or to involve consumers as co-creators. Recently it has also progressively gained credibility in urban processes, as it facilitates the engagement of stakeholders and their under-standing of the planning problem, as well as the sharing of criteria for vision setting, thus ena-bling a transparent urban planning decision process. During the STSM, which took place in April 2014, the authors have tried to outline how living labs are used in real cases of collaborative planning in the City of Amsterdam, and what is the role of new technologies in these living labs. Nine experiments of Living labs -with or without such a label- on urban processes of planning and requalification were explored, with the aim of tracing out the achievements and weak-nesses of the practices undertaken so far. Through data collection, field surveys and inter-views, the authors asked whether technology is really helping non-expert citizens in being part of complex urban process, allowing real co-creation to happen; and, more generally, analyzed how the role of institutions, designers and citizens is changing in this dynamic scenario. Amsterdam can be recognized as one of the most active cities in the European scenario in promoting innovative initiatives, by the use of open data and the development of smart pro-jects emerging from groups of citizen led proposals; participatory planning experiences are grounded on a solid tradition, and experimentation with numerous opportunities offered by new technologies. The city has recognized this potential and is investing on such projects, mainly by providing the conditions for a smart environment where open applications and initi-atives can be developed. There are several platforms that are already in place: these exhibit not only a high stage of development within the city itself, but also the role of catalyzer and leader of innovation which the City is covering among other cities in Europe. How is the methodology of Urban living Labs developing in such a setting? How and in which contexts has it been applied? Until which stage has it been experimented? Is technology really helping collaborative urban processes? Thanks to information collected during the STSM, au-thors will try to shed a light on these questions.

Big Data an opportunity for friendly cities Lorena Pocatilu The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Economic Informatics and Cybernetics Department Bucharest, Romania lorena.pocatilu@ie.ase.ro

ABSTRACT: The use of big data solutions is the biggest opportunity for friendly cities in our years. This happened because we need to access, process and use different data type very fast and big data solutions offers these facilities.

The concept of big data which creating value is not new, and in our age the effective use of da-ta is to becoming the basis element of competition. Cities of our time have always wanted to use correctly and to the real value the information and knowledge in order to make better, smarter, real time, fact-based decisions, this necessity of correct knowledge has fueled the growth of using big data. In this case the big data concept is the most important support for cities’ evolutions. In the world, many cities who are agree that this is true aren't sure how to make the most of it implementation. After a literature review analysis, this paper presents the steps for implement the solutions of big data in the core area of cities.

More and more companies from business and administration are agree that big data is an op-portunity for friendly cities. This paper highlights with examples from all over the world that those areas which use big data have good results. The areas that succeed aren't the ones who have the most data, but the ones who use it best. Big data will fundamentally change the way cities compete and operate. Companies from business and administration that invest in and successfully derive value from their data will have a distinct advantage over their competitors — a performance gap that will continue to grow as more relevant data is generated, emerging technologies and digital channels offer better acquisition and delivery mechanisms, and the technologies that enable faster, easier data analysis continue to develop.

Investment and development are the keys of our cities. This paper presents the impact of the big data solutions and how can use all the facility of this in friendly cities development. Having in view the researches in this area the cities development using big data in accordance with sustainability principles has become an opportunity of this century. An efficient access and use of huge quantity of data through big data solutions and the involvement of citizens in the initi-atives of local communities are the key elements that a city can use to achieve a harmonious development. The major research of this approach is centered on the necessity of use big data for friendly cities.

Significance of Social Aspects and Values of Economics Infrastructure in Addressing Development Challenges

Jurate Sliogeriene Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Department of Construction Economics and Management, Vilnius, Lithuania jurate.sliogeriene@vgtu.lt

Arturas Kaklauskas Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Department of Construction Economics and Management, Vilnius, Lithuania arturas.kaklauskas@vgtu.lt

ABSTRACT Awareness of the effect of economic infrastructure technologies (power generation, petro-

leum product supply, logistics, transport, etc.) on the natural environment, human health and safety leads to a new and responsible approach to the choice and development of technologies. When it comes to building infrastructure, especially in energy, growth scenarios and handling is-sues related to the choice and assessment of technologies, environmental studies must be in a particular spotlight.

The majority of countries in east Europe have inherited technologically inefficient, resource-intensive and centrally run economic infrastructure and energy industry. In case of a reorganisa-tion of systems, the top of agenda are economic and technology issues. Even when the concept of sustainable development is at work, its assessment highlights economic factors. Social devel-opment, however, obeys the laws of sociology, and a changed environment means that envi-ronmental studies need measures which help consider the changing environment, the attitudes and values of the general public, its favour for or hostility to technologies and the right to decide granted to the community in the process of important decision-making. Because the purpose of creation and implementation of infrastructure technologies is to satisfy public needs, handling of issues related to their growth, choice and operation must include feedback expressed through considerate assessment of the dimensions of environment protection and public values. Assess-ment of the dimensions covering values and social issues helps to figure out the interrelations linking technological solutions, economic benefits and the general public. Furthermore, a broader perspective and awareness of the fact that energy sector is a “business without borders” means that regard for the public attitudes and culture of the neighbouring countries is the foun-dation for future collaboration and partnership. Models dealing with solutions related to techno-logical development must analyse the dimension of values; it is the future norm.

The article looks into the impact of the dimension of values on the analysis which examines the effect of environmental factors and the growth and choice of energy generation technolo-gies. The authors propose decision support system based on multiple criteria analysis; the sys-tem analyses economic, technical, environment protection and social environment factors in an integrated manner, but simultaneously considers the impact of the dimension of values. The system analyses the dimension of values and social issues by adding the following criteria to criteria sets: 1) energy security; 2) assessment of public opinion on energy growth; 3) en-ergy industry’s culture and ethics; 4) creating equal opportunities to be employed and be re-sponsible for decision-making; 5) social responsibility principles in infrastructure companies. The research results discussed in the article suggest that choice of economics infrastructure technologies using multiple criteria methods is a good way to combine the criteria of perform-ance, economic expedience and ecological integrity with the criteria of technological innova-tiveness, socially-responsible operation and sustainable development.

A case study was undertaken in Ireland to examine how different providers of social fi-

nance in Dublin performed ex ante and ex post evaluations of their investments. A brief

overview of social finance is provided, introducing basic terminology and highlighting

strengths and challenges related to this emergent field. In particular, the section pre-

sents the literature examined to assess the state of theory - and to some extent of

practice - in relation to the emergence and assessment of social finance and impact in-

vesting in different regions including Europe, the United States, Canada and Australia.

This section discusses that there appears to be two ‘patterns’ of impact assessment (IA)

emerging. One is more focused on measuring the results (outputs, outcomes, impact)

across the three (or more) dimensions of the ‘Triple Bottom Line’. This approach is

more apparent when large philanthropies and impact investors are driving the devel-

opment of IA. Ratings approaches to IA also tend to be more prevalent in these cir-

cumstances, allowing the assessment of ‘portfolios’ of initiatives and investments. The

second pattern is more focused on processes and applying different measures in dif-

ferent situations following a ‘Theory of Change’ logic. More nuanced Social Return ap-

proaches to IA allow for both outcomes and processes to be evaluated, although in the

UK there does appear to be a coalescing around Social Return on Investment (SROI) as

the preferred institutional option for measuring impact. This approach is more apparent

in contexts in which government and/or networks of third sector organizations are driv-

ing the IA agenda. In either case, there are still many debatable assumptions, risks,

challenges and issues identified by theorists and practitioners. The second part of the

study explores approaches undertaken to evaluate social finance providers in Dublin. In

particular, it describe the types of social finance providers currently operating in Dublin

and analyses how they are (or are not) engaging with current 'state-of-the-art' evalua-

tion of their investments.

Comparing Theory & Practice in Social Finance - Impact Measurement in Ireland Chiara Pellegrini

Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Institute of Management, Pisa, Italy chiara.pellegrini.tn@gmail.com

ABSTRACT: