Bestand wählen

Mutually Assured Construction

Zitierlink des Filmsegments
Embed Code

Automatisierte Medienanalyse

Erkannte Entitäten
the part of the and if it the point of he game and the and the type that
would object it to but it the hello
everybody and thank you for joining me today I'm going to be talking a little bit about designing participatory systems and I'll be discussing about 6 of the projects that have done over the last 10 15 years the kind of work I do spend quite a broad spectrum from very sort of
short term temporary spectacular projects to long term permanent infrastructural projects and I'm going to try to those 6 projects to go from 1 end to the other and and I'm gonna be talking about and you know what what I'm hoping to do next whatever specifically wanna focus on those is a design strategy that I have been kind of formulating just over the last year so to try and understand where these projects are going and that is something called mutually assured construction and then explain that in in a little bit but I am happy to take questions at the end of the the talk but action I really like to be able to have questions in the
middle of the talk as well so if you do 1 of us something or make a comment please feel free to do so out while I'm talking I I think there's a microphone is going around I guess you just hold up your hand I mean so spend their time now just talking about this idea of assured construction by way of reminder 1st of all I just want to touch on this principle of mutually assured destruction how many people are actually familiar with this phrase you mind putting up you're in your hand so it looks like only about
half now in the seventies and eighties and the 19 seventies and eighties this was a a
phrase it was very much at the forefront of culture it was this kind of military strategy that had been adopted during the cold war which essentially said that if I attacked you with nuclear weapons in the time that it takes for me to attack you you're going to attack me and if my bonds land on your country they will destroy it and if yours land on my country it will destroy me
so as soon as I launch an attack I'm assuring my own destruction as it
were and and this principle of mutually assured destruction was the 1 that essentially meant that there was no incentive for either side to initiate a conflict there was plenty of incentive to keep increasing the arms and certainly there was no incentive to disarm but there was just no clear incentive to actually initiate a conflict and what actually happened was that through this kind of military strategy a strategy of conflict
it's a shared by binding together the futures of the 2 different parties that neither side acted negatively toward the other and and so for people who grew up in the seventies and eighties I think that this was uncertainty at the forefront of some uh at least when you think about them they have the so the threat of nuclear warfare what I wanna do is take that's principle further and I find it really interesting kind of strategy because in these in the context where you have 2 antagonists they have through basic basically you know you can spend thousands of hours looking at the game theory around us but essentially they have adopted a strategy that means that neither side is harm I
wanna go further and say well how do you harness those same kind of contradictions infections in a way that actually enables you not just remain static but actually to be constructive together to move forward together and sub that kind of exploring this idea of mutually assured construction which is essentially a strategy where we can build an act and make decisions together without requiring consensus it's all very easy if we have consensus of course it we all agree on something you know uh that none of this would really matters but in the messy world that we live in and in most cases we do not have consensus before needing to act and that's really where that did that this kind of idea of mutually assured construction has emerged the
now as a designer my interests
really is how do you structure this participation had to take things like frictions and contradictions and structure the participation in in such a way that this sort of come strategy emerges if you're concerned the interested
in in participatory design 1 of the most kind of a difficult concept to get your head around is wait how do you design for participation because part of the principle of participation should be that you can of devolver you decentralize
and uh the process but if there's a designer then that implies some kind of centralizing of decision making and this you know after many of angst-ridden years of wondering how do I stepped out of being a designer while designing the stories the systems what I
realized was at that actually in any system in any anything that we create there is always somebody who
makes the decisions that impact that impinge on other people but it is possible to make decisions about the things that we put in this world that open up
the set of possibilities for other people to make decisions we don't just have to sort of designed to simplify to narrow down the possibilities we can actually designed to open up the set of possibilities and so here I borrow from Heinz von thruster and and say that actually this that that the core principle of
participatory design is increasing the number of choices that other people have and I think that this this conflict's a little bit with a different branch of design which is all about they're making things easy and simple and trying to narrow down the set of possibilities and trying to produce as an author the final obvious solution in participatory projects usually there so complex that it becomes difficult really even to describe them with any authority because every single participant has a different story for that project so the question is
how do we actually deal with the frictions and contradictions impetus for enzyme in order to increase the number of choices on of I think that this is a fundamental thing that you have to come come to terms
with either as a designer in this kind of situation that you are going to be making these decisions but in so far as you can open up that process through your own decision-making to have the decisions be reinterpreted reevaluated rescripted re-appropriated or whatever by other people and that's your uh that's your goal and trying to to develop the interpreters for system so why is this important now for me this is not just about 0 you know everyone should be doing this together and you know it's all wonderful reduced stuff and we're all very happy and all that if a very pragmatic reasons the situation that we find the cells in the world right now seen see these kind
of crises in the very infrastructures that have formed our societies over the last few hundred years democracies are increasingly decided by those who opt out those who don't participate those who don't vote
they're the ones who to a large extent have started to determine the outcome if you look at the environment the kind of the triangle of climate change and inequality and geography that's actually going to re-shape our cities and where people live and how they lived in cities this is coming right now down here you can see a guarantee in Miami which has been flooded and of course it was all the wealthy and the sports cars that they got flooded but the wealthy can moving the poor cannot what is going to happen when in London as you see in this top right hand corner this is a a website and
call flood that map . net where you can map out what sea level that will have a sea level rise will have an effect on the geography of how we're going to deal with essentially
internal and immigration if you like is going to radically rescript the
way that we can work with each other finance or financial structures everything seems reasonably stable right now but when you look at the fact that we are at the absolute peak of global debt ever the it which is essentially the equivalent of having a sort of an athlete pumped full of steroids and pumping in more steroids and pumping even more and and when you combine that with
the crypto currencies which are essentially a set of some a another form of transaction when you combine that with massive tax evasion going on in the wealthy and when you combine that with the fact that financial professionals are now talking about the end of the at money
fiat money is essentially the idea that we can transact in uh in currencies financial professionals are actually talking
about the fact that we may no longer be able to transact in currencies when you combine all of
these the idea that our systems will continue to be the same in the next few decades just doesn't add up now of course there are a lot of people working on technological solutions to this and in many cases the principle of technologies of such technologies is that
they should design forest they should make decisions on our behalf we can think of sort of of autonomous vehicles you can think of smart city infrastructure like this 1 in Brazil but when you add into the mix the fact that when you adopt these kind of technology you also adopting the NSA having access to all your data you having actually Madison
leaks of your personal data when you adding to this the fact that actually the data is used to actually proactively
to subvert the systems that are designed to regulate it when you throw into this the fact that the Silicon Valley technology companies are using urban space to beta-test their features and a
15 year old boy can hack into a telco and then it is the idea that it's crazy that
fake news influence voting so Zuckerberg you realize that this this Silicon Valley View of technology is not in any way going to be able to deal with the complexity of all the financial financial the environmental and and be in uh um in uh the
democratic that complexities that we face and over the next few decades we need to radically redesigned the way we live together if we're going to make it through these next of 50 years it's just it's just a plain fact now I don't we can leave that to a small group of people who are developing the algorithms and systems and technologies with their own kind of up presumptions their own prejudices to to act on our behalf or we can figure out how we're going to do this together and I would say that the the issues that we face are so complex that no single voice or even a small collection of voices is going to figure out how to resolve them so we necessarily have to act collectively in some way to shake these futures but we can't wait until we all agree on how to do it we need to take a step forward even tho we don't yet have
consensus on on have act and that is why the kind of principled mutually assured construction I think is that it is so important to me
on what is kind of
emerged from from the hour so 3 aspects that are key to developing mutually assured construction system 1st of all is the idea that the design from Proposition
enables people to work together even though they don't yet have consensus just to explore ways to get people to actually
doing stuff even though they don't yet know whether they agree on stuff what I'm looking for here is the essentially instilling a sense of agency and people that they
can actually do something it is possible to respond in some way to the to the situation that we see some uh coming toward us the 2nd is enabling people to make decisions together but what we're looking for here is that people are actually involved
in in in making a decision about the future that essentially binds them in some with some kind of run responsibility for that future and by doing
that together they're actually essentially creating a shared responsibility for that future the I'm going to go through some of the projects to see how I've tried to to to probe each of these
in the 2nd and then the 3rd is figuring out how to act together and here what I'm
looking for is ways to enable people some who might not normally think that they can accomplish something to actually make a change make a difference do something that has some accountability that they've actually change something about some of the city their their neighborhood over what have so these of from the other kind of the the principle that been looking at and mutually assured construction but I really wanna stress that this is not about crowdsourcing we're not looking for the
optimal solution here this is not just about saying OK let's all get together and we're going to figure out how to do this this is about saying
actually the only way that we are going to be able to survive the next 50 years is by embracing the heterogeneity of ideas about embracing the complexity and the messiness and the fact that there is no 1 solution that there are many different ways that we're gonna approach this and essentially building in 2 are design processes ways that we can uh and kind of a
better use those as as building blocks if you like the of so I'm going to go through those 3 things
yeah and in each case and the talk about 2 projects just to illustrate however tried to sort of probe different aspects
of this I can't say that necessary or each project answers all the questions but he too there's been a kind of an experiment in probing the that the boundaries of this so working together collaborating without consensus and start with
as a protocol open verbal from
2006 and there's a little uh and slided down here at the bottom of the well you can see that the front but it basically goes from temporary cultural to permanent infrastructural and do 6 projects and again
ago from the temporary all the way to the infrastructural and at the end
but I'm starting with open verbal which was this basically was a
project that I did in Singapore and I have to say that I wasn't really thinking that much about participatory systems at that point I
I as as mentioned in the introduction and trained as an architect and I was interested in the way that people design and make cities and in this project I was looking at how to open up the process to other people ordinary citizens in building something that would change the skyline albeit just for
a short amount of time and essentially made this kind a modular system made of carbon fiber and structure with balloons and electronics it was members of the public that assembled this they designed how will the modules when together they then inflated they control and and they erected facing basically what the became of any team story structure the that erupted on the skyline albeit only for the 1 evening i and there and it is not very good 2006 brought new and how each of those lives you can imagine is about a meter wide so it's quite a large on a large structure and moved to the photos and
some I give slightly clearer idea the point was that this is ordinary people for perhaps the 1st time really feeling like they could affect and change from that's a
structure on the skyline of the flight Toronto
moving towards the permanent here on flight part Toronto was a project that I did with Natalie German drinkin in 2011 where I was commissioned by the city to do a project in their
native village square which is this sort of central and essential square in front of the city hall and essentially what I want to do is look
at public transportation and how to adopt a transportation methodology where the citizens to get involved in planning out the roots and more most particularly in prototyping where
the rich should be in order to rapidly reconfigure the city is 1 of the problems when you do new bus routes a new cycle lanes as they take 10 years to plan but you can bring them in their events of disrupt ascidians of carving out the area and and then everyone or lots of people get upset at the destruction and sometimes you don't get it right and so there is this kind of relationship between uh these
citizens of the city and the people who make these decisions where the people who make the decisions cannot fail and the and the citizens don't really have a say in in how to arm to configure the
transportation so what what we end up looking at here in Macon Phillips where was how to use it lines as a transportation system in the city of so it's you know it's thousand years
thousands of years old this technology basically just needs gravity but it's fast it's fun it's emission less and the most important thing is that it's very quick to deploying and to prototype and try out a transportation lines and
then it's not in the right location you can quickly redeploy somewhere else and and so the idea was basically to involve the local members of the public in defining and designing these different pathways and then actually trialling it there in person so what we did was and we turn it
into a kind of a flying experience where you know you should be able to fly to work and we have created these networks uh around they think that's where they essentially anyone could come and
and try out what it was like the idea here was that it you know essentially was not a proposition that enables us to if you like to build a shared memory of a possible future people didn't necessarily need to agree that this is the right thing to do but they could try it out and then have an opinion on where it should go how it should go work whether it should not be there all on and so it essentially the label of the can rapidly prototype the urban transportation in the city and involve members of the public in that process as well so open verbal and flight path were for me
I know they were about this question of getting people to work together without consensus the 2nd thing that I
mentioned was getting people to make decisions together and building this kind of a shared responsibility for collective future similar talk about a couple projects here that
start to move down this scale
towards the permanent infrastructural natural fuse was essentially a plot
with a power socket on and the amount of power available to the socket is limited by the capacity of the
plant to offset its carbon footprint
the idea was basically that you could plug in your electronic items and as the plant ruined sequestered carbon or captured carbon it could offset the carbon
footprint of your electric devices the thing is that even 1 plot was
not enough to offset your a light that was plugged in in order to offset the carbon footprint of the light but you need 6 plants to offset its carbon footprint so what happened was they were
network over the Internet and when you switch on your device it wakes up and it looks out on the network to see if there's 5 of the devices that are not currently being used to offset the energy
consumption and if there are more then you can borrow their carbon capturing capacity and offset against your own energy use and in so doing it
but the idea is that the community can retain carbon neutrality now in practice the way this work was that there was a switch where you could be either selfish or selfless if you were self
less than basically when you switch it
on it looks out on the network let's say there's only 3 plants available not 6 then you can only get enough energy until you start to threaten the carbon footprint of the community and at that point as if cuts off your energy so you might only have
5 minutes of light and then it'll cut
you off but of course in a participatory system you need to enable people to decide to be selfish if the case maybe somebody might actually need that light on no matter what harm if has a against the carbon capturing capacity the community and so they would choose selfish they might have heard somebody uh an
intruder in their flat in that case you get as much energy as you need but when and if you harm the carbon footprint of a community it sends out a kill signal to go and kill somebody else's plot and so it's done with vinegar injection uh over here and you don't know who's plant that's going to be some but the point is when you make that decision you know that you don't have an impact on somebody else's but you also can have an impact on the community's capacity but to distribute the carbon sequestering in practice what we do is we give
each plant 3 life if you like and when your plot loses the life you get an e-mail that basically says that this person was I had to be selfish and therefore your plant had to lose a life anew both seed on and that gives us an opportunity for people to discuss cable why were you selfish what actually happened there will you know what
what what did you need to do and so it's about building up essentially a system that encourages cooperative behavior doesn't require it but in the event of selfish behavior enables people that to be accountable to that question and enter into a discussion around some and so far for me that that this is a project that essentially some
prototypes and awaits economy distribute decision making in this case on the question of energy use and in such a way that doesn't require school to agree right at the beginning so it's been to different places in the world we have the deployment about 30 in New York then some in Sydney and Seoul also in Spain
somewhere from and so uh what we do is we basically set up a shot where people can come and rents these these plants for for about and 3 is 6 months away so distributing that decision making in such a way that doesn't require consensus from the beginning
the 2nd project that I wanna talk about in this and in this section are is a more recent project costs in there now with sender and as you can see was sort of sliding towards the the infrastructural there with sender we were commissioned for school in Cambridge some and it was a new building fully kitted out with sensors in a building management system it was a new community and there was a
group of students who were moving into this building what we ended up creating this was a two-year process where we work very closely with the incoming students will be created essentially was a uh a virtual cats and Augmented reality cat that lives in the school that cat responds to the environmental conditions to the sensors and the building and to the building management system and it has different behaviors it
changes color as it does different things on different days all of these things were designed by the students and the important thing is that what while you can
interact with it in certain ways and then you'll see that is so the gets bigger errors as different uh sensor data changes the students are learning a little bit about the building management system in the sensor data through this cat and their interactions with it but when the cat gets hungry when you've interacted with it too much it goes out on the network and hunt
for food I'm at that point the cat will appear on somebody's on 1 student's laptop and and it'll go there and it'll beg for food the student that has a decision to make about how much food to give to the cat and that is based on the amount of food that they have to give to the cat is based on how much solar energy has been generated today by the solar panels on the building so they go
through this kind of process of thinking about how much resource they can allocate to the cat how much they'll have to say for later and how much they will uh work with their fellow students on on on giving food later on and so the the just some some clips from the the process it was about 20 workshops I will you to get to get through of just let this place is that what at the end
they designs in there they named her
life and in the design of behavior and you have gone to the building management system is and the time and you have a a well I that there is clearly an is known to be the end of the world the so again this is a
project about figuring out how to take something quite complex like a building impacted technology get students involved in making some decisions about that and essentially having something that's going to grow up with them over the next few years because this is a new community um it's in it's in a part of Cambridge that's being uh to be
redeveloped from and crucially getting into that decision making together making those decisions about resource allocation together
yeah so we talked about
working together but deciding together finally I just wanna talk about acting together and talk and talk about 2 projects that have look at this time acting together as they said before it's about that sense of accomplishment in the sense that you can actually do something that does have a change from
and this is this is often quite difficult because even when you have to work together and make decisions together you don't necessarily have to leave a trace of on the world but of course is fundamental to bringing together those other
aspects so I wanna talk about from something that took place in 2011 but in Japan and some of you might know that I found a
platform called patch of a which is essentially a very early Internet of Things generalize Data platform and community and that enable the senses of all kinds around the world to be connected into web
infrastructure where people could use each other's data in real time I when focus on those what took place in Japan following the radiation crisis after the disaster at Fukushima which is that in the short space of time after that disaster the Japanese community people in general in Japan would just so frustrated trying to find out what was going on in terms of the radiation the local governments were issuing from PDF reports every few
days the might have a bunch of numbers and then the didn't really mean anything but nobody really knew what was going on they want to have some kind of sensor data and and what
we noticed in Japan was that the patch they community was mobilizing to start to connect up Geiger
counters and radiation monitors to publish in real-time
data from the sensors a across the country and
so where there been very little data before suddenly there was and a whole bunch of data available from many different sources now the conversation that emerged at that time because there was a lot of discussion about this because this is messy data too many people there were measurements that
were taken by amateurs using all sorts of different equipment that they may or may not have connected incorrectly arm and so there was a whole can a contingent of people saying this date is totally pointless because it's not objectively measured a you know it's not
scientifically a valid using different units we don't even know whether by its the correct data or not but this
fundamentally misunderstood what was going on which was that people would just trying to make sense of it and have some kind of sense that they could do something In this uncertain context and they weren't trying to a mass assigned to scientifically objective dataset they don't have
any interest in building and a some kind of a data repository for later analysis and externally that is 1 no is the radiation worse at the front of my house or the back of my house should I move my bed from this room to this room would actually be better these are the kind of questions they were having and the fact that this was also taking
place in a public forum where people had access to data did mean that these people were engaging in all those questions about
how do we make this data better how do I make this data available in a format you can make use of all you using that uh microsieverts and I'm using that
0 great OK let me figure out how I can convert this but what was really important I think is what started happening later as this and as this datasets are
getting a broader and broader which is the people started building stuff on top of that data high and sound and the built
this thing called the Japan Geiger maps which for the 1st time to call that data related to an exposure time because a course of radiation it's not just the that that the height of radiation the amount of radiation that you're supposed to results about how long you're exposed to so if you're exposed to low radiation for a long period of time that can also be dangerous so she felt this interface where you could map out different parts of Japan and compare it to pre-disaster radiation levels and also look at the exposure time and uh in
terms of its health effects but so this is 1 thing that took place they were visualizations you can't quite see here but
I'm away figure out where the peaks of radiation are right now but there was some another visualization to look at but trends of where the the data was speaking all of these created by the community but there was a winds of Fukushima
Android app which basically took when data on patch they combined it with the radiation data and predicted where the radiation would next week and so on and so forth there were dozens of these things of people using the data as messy as it was not just to build up the sort of objective maps but actually to do stuff that enabled them to make decisions so for example
if you didn't have a Geiger counter you could use some the Messala AP on your
neighbors that radiation Sensor but if you didn't have a radiation sensors that could be connected in the Internet there was a form where you could just manually input those numbers at such and such and such as this was people actually trying to act in a context where they didn't feel like the government was sufficiently motivated to do so my but and
finally over yeah unvoiced over is a project from last year up
in uh it's something that we worked on it for a couple of years again and in the north of England in an area called East Durham
but we were working in a little a town and village actually called peacefully and Horton which are right next to each other and over time over that many sessions working with the local community 1 of the things that emerged was this idea that I'm they they were looking to have a voice if you like this was former coal mining the territory that had been largely cut off if you like from the technological developments that had been I installed in some of the bigger cities so you have these sort of so-called smart city projects games installed in big cities like Glasgow and Manchester but a place like Easter and would never have any kind of uh technological and intervention public transport had been cut off you know they're there used to be a train line that would go very nearby but that it got got removed and so what what started emerging and can compressing a couple of years where the workshops was certain emerging during these workshops was the idea of a voice of of connecting up different parts of the did different villages Horton
Peterlee other young to the old I'm that binding together some kind of sense of community where people didn't necessarily speak with their neighbors anymore but and what we started thinking about basically was how to create
a radically public communication infrastructure not 1 way you can have
private conversations with each other but rather 1 where every conversation would be completely public and where the infrastructure would be owned and managed by the local community now what that meant and most importantly that actually the
very physical manifestation of this would be necessarily and bound into people's ownership of it if you see in yeah what that meant was that if you wanted to connect up 2
different locations the path that the that
the communication would take would depend on which loop of the local community decided to post a fragment of that network and the project itself could be used as an excuse to go to your neighbor and say look with connected up these 2 streets if you also join into this will be able to get that much closer to the other end of the the um the line and so the project was partly about deploying this
infrastructure and it was partly about their local community actually working with their neighbours to figure out who would take the next part of this peer network on it was also partly about the question of some of what
you do with this infrastructure so the way it was the shaping up to to manifest itself would be that at at some location you could speak in you could you could perform where you could do whatever it is you wanna do that sound Woods echo and ricochet
from house to house go into the house and you can actually follow the path of light to see where the audio
was going in as the audio went into your living room you come out on little speaker and then it would bounce and go out and carry on down the road to the other end of the line that was a principal glycosidic and a radically public communication infrastructure where you can see where the where the lines of communication are going so the most important thing that emerge from all of this was what do you actually use it for how do you govern this infrastructure have you start to make decisions about what its use for their was that there are all sorts of things that that emerge the idea of using it for
reminiscing and stories bedtime stories politics religion and censorship all these kind of discussions the people might have once they are kind of connected through this from this is the just lose short video to show you how
how that actually looks on an individual basis and then I have a whole lot that on the history is not good have
and 2nd game the arm taking so here I think you can see it sort of bouncing down and going down this road with life has some trade they began in the lights down and all that in fact many thanks to well I have gained the are taking it all in a manner of thinking that i the kids love for telling jokes and and so here's the radio
box that you have on the inside and you can listen
to this uh here's a photo Jewish show going
on I'm going to show the video is this is actually the community that we worked with some my and this
is just a couple minutes I let it play outside value
my and minus work part can you put the volume of a little cold of
that the young it's clear not just
say it in fact any want to say the whole
corre village on the block which cost right next to the and Hall is the
sign the city but but but but but but but but but
but but but but but the size
of national would in this
approach the Chanderpaul which
I just don't for you and at quite enjoyed it I think it might mean
curiosity book you all came out
to see what we will look at the recent
literature review the standard for them
when we actually saw or and you understand when I was speaking might
fall were the flashes of light
from water or shaving will true
will go and that was like Blackpool really wishes to do all
this project the process
of figuring out yeah you see me having a voice in public speaking and of of of being able to share stories and opinions somehow public the way the world about was essentially to
to create almost like an excuse for
people to talk to each other to see and
community take on board the project of this size some very favorable so don't want to come to speak not know what to say and realized actually people work and so actually stand going to know what have something to say and even if not most kids in that there's this new those kids
continued to be different from it actually has
fast enough and actually evidence
saying in public broadcaster straight
in country price on what a change and
they were all involved in 1 way or the other
and this whole instead now
contrast income I'm going to use the whole
thing has been really supportive of voice so
that and I have been so overwhelmed with what and how so 1 thing I like about
this project is the fact that the video does not convey and all the final deployment because that was really not really the
important thing important thing was that the process that the local community had gone through and to to to get this deployed what we discovered along the way was there were 3 cousins you didn't even know that they all live near each other and and they discovered each other through this process and
that kind of is the whole point of this kind of project and is gonna wrap up just very briefly to say that I mean I just about a month ago we we release this project and will be in the urban innovation toolkit which is trying to bring together all of these aspects of mutually assured construction on was commissioned by the Future Cities Catapult and essentially it is a software platform for building this can a shared understanding of an urban innovation project between many different partners so focusing on a on the problems the stakeholders the methods that evidence and the impact on how all of this actually connect stop on because in many cases these innovation projects are technology-led rather than led by the actual people that are that are involved in in the project itself and so on and it's essentially a
methodology for trying to do trying to work with very complex situations and making sure that you actually do have some impact that you are able to evaluate it that it does have something to do with the problems that you're dealing with that the stakeholders are involved in the design of that that that project in such a such a it doesn't you know it's
on it something that we are we worked with the 6 different cities around the UK to test out and make sure that it actually worked at different scales of project and and there's a bunch of case studies as well where you can look at projects have been done around the world along similar lines essentially again this is a project about building a shared memory of a possible future but in in a
way that that people who don't necessarily yet agree on something we can work towards at some name and with that I will thank you and also for any questions
thank happy to take any questions there's a question do we need a microphone or can read I we have microphones over
there so that you was not so we have plenty of time for questions and with a tune a with 2 microphones some maybe a little possible want use the microphone you and if you have questions
that picture and if you have questions please raise your hands and then we can see you and that you might OK this questions you can hire and my
question is how and did you have what kind of relationship did you have to establish to involved kids have and this kind of project In the
last project in particular voice of alignment antenna and basically mean amenable because I'm
really wondering how did you get to what you're doing like a how did you involved yourself out into into this kind of participation because you seem to be some kind of a system designed to facilitate the from the I guess I guess is you see I
started as a mentioned as an architect interested in people in their relationship to each other and uh the spaces around and so on and so early on in in the late nineties I was that she just working general on interactive environments 1 but I think that it was partly I have to say you just so you know I I was not very confident in what I was
doing and and in many cases I didn't wanna make the final decision about some things you know about what it looked like or how was configured what it did or or or what have you and I and that was for me the moment where I started kind of
opening up the question of OK had away I mean again very pragmatic reason you know how do I get other people to to that
to help figure this thing out but then as the you know as as my
practice evolved and as you know as a kind of
started having a methodology of sorts what I realized is that actually the fundamental to every single project is conversation and and so a project like over it took 2 years at the part we took a year and a half months to figure out roughly what the project was for that period time nobody knew and so no you nobody had a sort of nobody had ownership of what that project should finally be it was a really a question of developing a sense of trust over that very long period and so the relationship of trust is really fundamental and and I have to say that was ever was quite a difficult project another many moments where it felt like nothing whatever come together and and it's so just kind of being there and being they're constantly you know we in London so it's about a 5 hour train ride away but we you know we actually go up and stay there for periods of time are actually working on site and uh was was was kind of crucial I think
that's the thanks do we have another question yeah in the 4 stroke you or the dog it will be a little I've been working with of groups of London where the states of it and
in those there people with different objectives place a little ranging from over and what happens in all of these is that's everyone that ends up fighting each other and they will lose out this is what happens every time how could people avoid this problem the and I
can't say necessary and the best that conflict management but I I think the 1 really fundamental thing is that I've noticed is that if you try and get people around a table to achieve some final goal that doesn't work because you start to disagree about whether we can ever get there whether it's the right thing to get to you whether you know whether we should be doing this at all so what I try and do it the very 1st stage is structured discussions around what is the goal of the project rather than what is the kind of outcome if you mean and to make sure that that goal constantly changes and that's an important thing because I think that is different from the way that the community design was done before where you would have a goal and you make sure that stayed the same so that you could constantly check whether you're achieving it for me what I've noticed is that actually what you should do is constantly question not just whether you're on track or whether you're even headed to the right goal at all so I would suggest that you know in in an area where you have people that you already arguing and uh in general getting people at at at 1st just to discuss the goal not even agree on it but discuss and understand the complexity of the goal of the outcome not just the outcome itself might be a step towards without the neighborhood from here if they
affect makes question just in the last row in the very last row but can you see the so far away take your time I think you have on your last chance of how do how do you organize all formalize these constant changes of of the gold we have regular meetings with stakeholders and do you have a really like every month every year we we talk about cold tolerant how it organized it is cost slightly different for
different projects some and a different
context we don't necessarily have a temporal rhythms but what we do try and do is start off with some small group of people and they really almost doesn't matter who that group of people is think about a goal that we might be trying to achieve with this project and and then decide who should be at the next meeting that is not here right now and then at the next gathering we go through the same process of questioning what is the goal and who is not in this conversation that should be and that so that helps me to the next so that the next gathering it's it's not quite as clean as all that it's of course a little bit more massive that but that's the basic principle where we're we're trying to basically the question the question the goal the whole way through but also gather more and more ambassadors if you like for the project for people that have been involved in maybe not in determining that specific manifestation but at least went into 1 of the fundamental conversations around and the the very purpose of the project in the 1st place more questions
yes but if not the of my question is about how we use them to to a different
level of stakeholders is closely for the and if we say that the level of engagement with the primary stakeholder and the 2nd is to hold the hold on how can we have to include them in the discussions 2 equals like to use some sort of how how how much of sharing we give them in decision making and
also how much can we actually have board uh the idea of the 2nd is the quotas for example into the design of the project I can't actually see human waving so I can see where I'm speaking of OK and the columns at but that's about a complex question I'm I'm not sure what you mean by the difference between primary and secondary stakeholders but I think that's In examples you will look at look at all for example we going out of the
project design it on the management of preventing the shores of the work of from flooding has so that the primary stakeholders would be the people on the land on the size of the final on the land that on the source of the work that might be more so than was 1 of the and uh the 2nd would be people who lived beyond that 1 and beyond that but demand of whatever you need to start from the forest and up the hills to the land in nearby that it was so that multiple level of sequences and not about people let different levels of of what is to stay in in that whole brought and project In that case I would actually
and direct you to the work in constituency on in chief and which I can tell you that afterwards but there is some very interesting phenomenon going on for the that that that go on there after the earthquake in in in a similar kind of situation where there is a complexity of stakeholders is not an easy question to answer but essentially it is that it is bounded on some of on the principle of creating trust and we we can talk about it afterward if you like to any other questions do
with everquest for the questions next question now so I think we're running out of time is gone so maybe we have a big loss for thank you
thank the 1st
that of if I did
Nachbarschaft <Mathematik>
Umsetzung <Informatik>
TUNIS <Programm>
Vorzeichen <Mathematik>
App <Programm>
Gebäude <Mathematik>
Dichte <Stochastik>
Kontextbezogenes System
Rechter Winkel
Computerunterstützte Übersetzung
Ordnung <Mathematik>
Repository <Informatik>
Tabelle <Informatik>
Relationale Datenbank
Folge <Mathematik>
Weg <Topologie>
Endogene Variable
Virtuelle Realität
Spezifisches Volumen
Verzweigendes Programm
Aussage <Mathematik>
Patch <Software>
Abstimmung <Frequenz>
Prozess <Physik>
Gemeinsamer Speicher
Komplex <Algebra>
Einheit <Mathematik>
Regulärer Graph
Uniforme Struktur
Mixed Reality
Kontrast <Statistik>
Wurzel <Mathematik>
Figurierte Zahl
Schnitt <Graphentheorie>
Konstruktor <Informatik>
Zentrische Streckung
Plot <Graphische Darstellung>
Arithmetisches Mittel
Erweiterte Realität <Informatik>
Twitter <Softwareplattform>
Betrag <Mathematik>
Strategisches Spiel
Nuklearer Raum
Autonomic Computing
Projektive Ebene
Web Site
Interaktives Fernsehen
Zellularer Automat
Digitale Photographie
Leistung <Physik>
Wald <Graphentheorie>
Internet der Dinge
Physikalisches System
Objekt <Kategorie>
Mapping <Computergraphik>
Dreiecksfreier Graph
Manufacturing Execution System


Formale Metadaten

Titel Mutually Assured Construction
Serientitel re:publica 2017
Autor Haque, Usman
Lizenz CC-Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 3.0 Deutschland:
Sie dürfen das Werk bzw. den Inhalt zu jedem legalen Zweck nutzen, verändern und in unveränderter oder veränderter Form vervielfältigen, verbreiten und öffentlich zugänglich machen, sofern Sie den Namen des Autors/Rechteinhabers in der von ihm festgelegten Weise nennen und das Werk bzw. diesen Inhalt auch in veränderter Form nur unter den Bedingungen dieser Lizenz weitergeben.
DOI 10.5446/33076
Herausgeber re:publica
Erscheinungsjahr 2017
Sprache Englisch

Inhaltliche Metadaten

Fachgebiet Informatik
Abstract Cooperation is difficult, and designing for it is even harder. Even when everybody agrees on an end goal, and everybody agrees on what is needed to achieve that end goal, it does not mean that everyone (or even anyone) will be able to take the first step, which is a most important step.

Ähnliche Filme