Social and human perspectives must be part of urban development

- There is an urgent need for greater insight into the needs and wishes of the population about what improves the quality of life for the individual, says Ingvil Aarholt Hegna, senior advisor in Architecture at DOGA.

As part of our stakeholder interview series we’ve asked Ingvil Aarholt Hegna, senior advisor in Architecture at the Norwegian Centre for Design and Architecture (DOGA) about urban sustainability, smart cities and citizen participation.

Ingvil Aarholt Hegna is the project leader of "Folketråkk" a planning tool under development to make it easy and attractive to conduct real participation in urban planning projects. She has long experience working as an architect in different projects and adviser in spatial planning, with special field including children and young people in planning and local development.

1. In the last decades, new ways of research have been implemented, and they are referred to as crowdsourcing, citizen participation, citizen science, public participation or volunteered information. Where do you see the biggest advantage of such approaches?

From an urban development perspective there is an urgent need for greater insight into the needs and wishes of the population about what improves quality of life for the individual. The development of cities in Norway is largely determined by the developers, where profit naturally is a motivation. The person that will live in the city is often forgotten. 

Increased involvement of citizens provides new knowledge and human content to urban development. Also, increased participation strengthen democracy and politicians get better decisions when they adopt plans. Public participation provides greater social sustainability in urban development - and can contribute to new and more customized solutions for the population, that increases mobility, quality and diversity of cities and villages.

Increased involvement of citizens provides new knowledge and human content to urban development.

2. Where do you see the biggest challenge of such approaches?

Facilitation and implementation of participation is a challenge. There is a lack of general knowledge and experience in facilitating participatory processes in Norwegian municipalities as well as in other fora. Many municipalities invite to public meetings as part of the planning process, but input from these meetings does not capture the representative opinion of the population. 

Also, participation is perceived as demanding, more as an obligation than as a resource. This means that one often chooses the minimum level of involvement, such as notification to neighbors and public meetings. The time frame is demanding too, usually the deadlines for hearings are 6 weeks. 

The authorities' desire for a shorter processing time will make this even more difficult. It is also a challenge, in planning, to convey the contents of the plans so that people can provide input that is real. The themes are large, complex and not very concrete - it's hard to sort and prioritize.

Understanding of the planning process is a challenge; what can I as a citizen say something about, in which phase, and what can I expect from public participation?

When the input from public participation comes in, it's challenging for municipalities to implement it into concrete plans and projects. Involving citizens creates expectations, they want answers and feedback. If they don’t get it, the planning processes and participation loses legitimacy.

3. The vision of smart cities is nowadays a well-established path based on integrating multiple ICTs. Where do you see the greatest potential (if any) for the use and integration of multiples ICTs for urban sustainability.

The technical development of smart technology is an important and exciting contribution to urban development, including infrastructure and smart environmental measures. 

Seamless solutions for public transport with ticketless travel information about smart travel routes, city bike schemes etc. already exists, making mobility easier and less car use. Environmentally friendly solutions, such as energy harvesting in the road system, stormwater solutions, etc. need smart technology along with superior, comprehensive planning of cities and villages. Handling and sorting of waste - in large and small scale is also something we should develop to be more systematized, - among much else.

Map-based digital participation tools, like “Barnetråkk”, gives municipalities specific input that can be used directly into their map-based solutions. This provides the municipality with surveying of specific sites and unique local knowledge of those who live there as a basis for developing cities and towns with larger degree of identity and predictability. It can also facilitate the maintenance of public spaces and improve safety where people live and reside.

What are the biggest challenges with digitalization and the integration of multiple ICTs for urban sustainability?

Smart Cities as a concept is too much about technology. The social and human perspectives must be included to a greater extent. One challenge with smart technology is that it can take up too much focus and replace human contact and interaction. Focusing too much on technology makes us more vulnerable. It must be an addition not a replacement for human contact and interaction. 

Smart Cities as a concept is too much about technology. The social and human perspectives must be included to a greater extent.

What does the term social responsible tell you? 

Socially responsible, to me, is about thinking of the human when the city is being planned and built. The society is constantly changing and cities grow larger, with larger complexity and diversity. In the future, we will be living closer, more compact on less space per person. The social meeting places are becoming increasingly important - they must be attractive and satisfy different needs.

New buildings and infrastructure must also have greater flexibility so that areas can be used for various purposes, as necessary. Increased joint use of functions and areas are essential to meet future needs. It will also give greater social sustainability.

We as professionals create places for people, but should rather be creating with the people!

Do you see it compatible with crowdsourcing and/or citizen participation in research?

Absolutely - it is closely linked to the involvement of citizens. It’s the people themselves who know what their needs are and what gives them improved quality of life - this is unique and individual. 

People have opinions about their local environment that can strengthen local communities and provide better solutions. It also gives citizens greater ownership of what is being built and planned - and they will use it and care for it. We as professionals create places for people, but should rather be creating with the people!

Any other thoughts that you would like to share?

In urban development, it’s crucial to work across disciplines, responsibilities and interests. Everything is interconnected and our future society requires increased collaboration between the public and private sectors. Sharing insight, knowledge and create common ground is one of the success factors for good urban development.

Everything is interconnected and our future society requires increased collaboration between the public and private sectors.

----------------
Questions or something to add? Leave a comment below.


This blog post is part of a series where we interview stakeholders about ICT, crowdsourcing, research and urban sustainability. 
You can take part in the dialogue by using the hashtag #crowds4research 

iResponse on twitter: @iresponse_rri