Crowdsourcing in urban planning as cities go smart
Urban planners in close companionship with the ICT sector get new opportunities to discuss the city as a flexible and responsive structure as cities go smart. Crowdsourcing has a role to play, but standards and guidelines for its application may be needed. Silje Klepsvik and Tone Megrunn Berge from Kaleidoscope tell us about crowdsourcing as part of urban planning.
Tone and Silje, Kaleidoscope (photo: Helge Garke)
As part of our stakeholder interviews series, we had an exchange with Silje Klepsvik and Tone Megrunn Berge from the Norwegian-Finnish architecture firm Kaleidoscope about crowdsourcing in urban planning. Silje and Tone are both architects by training and located in Bergen.
Kaleidoscope has offices in Bergen and Helsinki and their projects vary in scales and approaches, spanning from urban planning to experimental installations and product design. The firm is a member of the Finnish Uusi Kaupunki collective, specialising in participatory urban planning processes.
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?
Silje: When people have better opportunities to affect the development of their surroundings and feel that their voice is being heard, they become more engaged and usually, they also take more responsibility for their environment.
Well-crafted participation processes lead to better-informed plans, more satisfied citizens and can improve life quality for the city’s inhabitants. Basically, more involved citizens create better cities!
When citizen participation is introduced in the early stages of planning, it can uncover disagreements and possible pitfalls early on.
Tone: Crowdsourcing is a fast and direct way to create commitment amongst planners, authorities and the public in general. It creates a sense of commonness.
Crowdsourcing can reveal information that cannot necessarily be found through google searches or other databases. It gives the planners a possibility to create a new cartography which can influence planning and decision-making.
Silje: Participatory processes, in fact, enables more democratic planning where citizens become decision makers. The planners benefit as well, as crowdsourcing give a broader understanding of the context, of complex systems and networks.
Tone: Furthermore, crowdsourcing can be the spark to establish or strengthen the social practices in an area or amongst a group.
Silje: In addition, crowdsourcing can have economic advantages and lead to more efficient planning processes. When citizen participation is introduced in the early stages of planning, it can uncover disagreements and possible pitfalls early on.
Also, early reactions upon difficult issues entail less complications, economic or other, than if these issues are to be tackled later.
Tone: And, let’s not forget, the great thing about crowdsourcing in public planning is that it can be a lot of fun! Happenings that go beyond standard questionnaires, with inspiring and carefully prepared venues, well formulated questions, a varied set of tools, and inclusive facilitation. So many chances appear to dive into!
Crowdsourcing is a fast and direct way to create commitment amongst planners, authorities and the public in general. It creates a sense of commonness.
2. where do you see the biggest challenge of such approaches?
Tone: Crowdsourcing is a popular thing. It has many names, and it comes in many forms. Probably it is a challenged concept by the fact that the public can only engage in so many things at the same time. In a heavy flow of information, it is a challenge to stand out and get attention for the crowdsourcing process.
Silje: If the means of reaching out does not include a segment that is a good representation of the public, it can potentially give some people more say than others, which can be problematic. The methods for reaching out in urban planning therefore needs to be varied and not only focus on the use of computer-based communication or a single form of communication.
To follow-up with implementation and evaluations becomes even more important as the participatory processes creates high expectations by those who have given of their time and effort to contribute. If this is not met, the processes can have a negative impact and create discontent, distrust towards the planners and/or planning authorities.
Tone: Yes, processes that stretch out in time, with seemingly little progress or rather evidence of stagnation is a risk factor because it can tear down trust amongst the participants.
Of course, there are challenges such as timing, poorly defined limits for what is actually possible to affect, and also tick-the-box-attitudes are threats.
On the other hand, the smart city development with big data collection and analysis is commonly driven by strong commercial forces. The notion of the smart city must be a complement to and not opposed to the creative human input from good crowdsourcing processes.
The methods for reaching out in urban planning needs to be varied and not only focus on the use of computer-based communication or a single form of communication.
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.
Silje: Through crowdsourcing, people are given better tools to be active citizens participating in the sustainable development of their environment. Especially bottom-up initiatives have a great potential to thrive with the use of new ICTs.
Crowdsourcing in combination with crowdfunding is especially interesting in this aspect. Also, top-town initiatives can draw huge advantages from multiple ICTs to obtain more sustainable plans, for example in transportation planning.
Tone: Until quite recently planners and architects have dealt with a city’s hardware and software as a matter of programming people's everyday life and creating a physical environment for these interactions to play out.
Flexibility has come in the form of a sites’ passive property or capacity to absorb or support different behaviors. The idea of a flexible space is evolving under the recognition of the smart city. Planners in close companionship with the ICT sector will get new opportunities to discuss the city as a flexible and responsive structure.
The notion of the smart city must be a complement to and not opposed to the creative human input from good crowdsourcing processes.
4. What are the biggest challenges with digitalization and the integration of multiples ICTs for urban sustainability?
Tone: Our privacy is challenged. Will there be sensors and surveillance on every corner? To whom do we trust our data? There is certainly is a risk potential here.
Silje: Yes, big data collection definitely comes with the concern for privacy risks. Integration of ICTs and the observation and collection of data regarding the citizens behaviour, activities, and other information need to safeguard privacy.
The challenges address the need for policies or regulation to secure the protection of personal data.
Also, data gathering needs to be complemented with solid implementation strategies that commits the developer or planning authority to follow up and take responsible choices to achieve democratic and sustainable results.
5. What does the term social responsible tell you? Do you see it compatible with crowdsourcing and/or citizen participation in urban planning?
Tone: To be socially responsible means to engage in works that promote values which are inclusive of our clients, partners and the society as a whole. In general, it is compatible, but not limited to or ensured by crowdsourcing processes.
Silje: I believe it is compatible, but it requires policies and ethical guidelines in order for the new tools to be used for the public good and to the benefit of the environment, for it to not be misused for profit maximization or political advantage.
Data gathering needs to be complemented with solid implementation strategies that commits the developer or planning authority to follow up and take responsible choices to achieve democratic and sustainable results.
6. Any other thoughts that you would like to share?
Silje: When citizens become more engaged they also become more alert and can actively react upon decisions, voice their critique, but also share their ideas and knowledge, and have a stronger possibility to affect decision-making and enrich the development of their city. This is what is great about the use of ICTs in urban planning.
Tone: Crowdsourcing is a brilliant way to communicate the potential that lies in a better designed environment for common use and wellbeing. It is crucial that we keep the public engaged in a dialogue about planning and urban development.
I really think that a better informed and more demanding public would be an advantage for all planners. Done the right way a crowdsourcing process supports this aim, and then it is a win-win!
It is crucial that we keep the public engaged in a dialogue about planning and urban development.
--------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a question 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