Europan - logo europan.no

Søk

close search

EVOLUTION 2: SEGREGATION VS. SHARING
Sharing is an issue in the design and regeneration of an adaptable city: sharing of spaces, expertise, values, imaginary; not just an idealistic point of view but also a repositioning for a performative economy and society of another type. Sharing at the urban scale can stimulate the «empowerment» of coexistences between different cultures: preserving the collective while inventing a more appropriate organization of the society. How could sharing be a way to develop cheaper and lighter solutions to build an ecological and sustainable city? How could it be a way to co-regenerate the inhabited environments?
The figures for sharing are an antidote against a strong tendency to individualism and against excessive division and artificiality. They are strong project tracks and a “capacity to do”. Could sharing help support change and foster «productive frictions» in respect of the other in other forms of activation of citizenship?

a- The figure of solidarity to increase active sharing
Installing solidarity amongst different kinds of people at the urban scale implies a dimension of culture. In other words, investing in active social engagement allows the creation of a “common” between an increasing diversity of the cities’ inhabitants.
Consequences for Europan:
Each site brief could encourage the participants (cities, users, site developers and young designers) to visualize a fantasy of solidarity and active sharing beyond the mere representation of physical objects and linking the final result and the process of making.

b-Sharing by increasing accessibility to urban amenities
Urban amenities and services generate a sense of sharing and belonging at the proximity scale of neighbourhoods. Still, the safety regulations and fragmented governance too often transform such infrastructures into isolated mono functional enclaves.
Consequences for Europan:
The sites must allow offering alternatives of uses and spatial connections to proximity. Timesharing through reversibility or the evolution of uses increases accessibility and adds new urban roles to such services (schools, athletic facilities, shopping centres, public transport, roads, etc.) The sites must allow increasing accessibility for alternated uses.

d- Sharing to reduce self-sufficiency
The crisis brings out the necessity to design and manage spaces with fewer resources. It helps break open the self-sufficient consumerist bubble and introduce a collective dimension in the urban everydayness.
Consequences for Europan:
The sites can propose new programs that encourage such kind of sharing. For example, the retired persons living alone and unable to pay for separate facilities generate new residential developments with sharing services. Or car sharing decreases car use in the city therefore increasing the possibilities of multi-use of liberated public spaces.

e- Sharing between humans and non-humans
The energy sufficiency and reversibility of human actions require rethinking new alliances between human and non-human actors: people, natural resources, animals, technology, etc. While creating a diversity of associations this sharing modifies the representation of actors in the making of the urban environment.
Consequences for Europan:
The sites briefs must propose new representations of sharing in human and non-human actors spaces, of their conflicts or convergences and their priorities