Prosperity for All
EDIT’s theme of Prosperity for All is based on the United Nations’ ‘sustainable development goals’: a set of objectives for future international development, such as good health, education, and gender equality. EDIT investigates the role design plays within this. Despite the current existence of innovative ideas, their realisation remains problematic.
How to make and safeguard the commons is an ongoing question in design, urbanism and politics. How do we deal with shared goods and resources such as safety, health, justice, clean air, and public space? What is deemed as the extent of the commons: is it the community, the neighbourhood, the city, the oceans, or the world?
For All, By All
The Dutch pavilion For All, By All examines how we approach the commons in urban development today. Featuring nine projects as possible contributions to the discussion, the exhibition is conceived as a forum and asks: Given that public goods matter, how do we go about governing, making, maintaining, safekeeping and improving them?
From a crowdfunded ocean cleaning initiative to mood-augmenting street lighting, the featured projects manifest rivalling strategies: by choice, by voice, or by force. How can individual choices be wielded for public benefit? How can we leverage the ideas and the momentum of the crowd? Can we rely on the continued self-organisation of a community? To what extent should the stewardship of the world’s resources be based on economic viability? Do we need stronger economic incentives, greater oversight and harsher punishments?
Featuring projects initiated by: CML Leiden University, Delft University of Technology, Polly Higgins, Judy and Wil Matthews, Metabolic, Next Nature Network, Boyan Slat, Space&Matter, Jan and Bram Taks, TU/e Intelligent Lighting Institute, Waag Society, ZUS [Zones Urbaines Sensibles]
Curation: Bureau Europa (Agata Jaworska, Saskia van Stein), This Must Be The Place (Jorn Konijn)
Pavilion Design: BRIGHT The Cloud Collective (Thijs van Spaandonk, Gerjan Streng, Stephanie Ete)
Media Programming and Design: Design Displacement Group
3D Printing: Design Fabrication Zone
Pavilion Construction: Perfect Distoration (Jeff Crews)
Consultants: Institute Without Boundaries (Luigi Ferrara), Metabolic (Nadine Galle, Oscar Sabag Muñoz), Ryerson University (Filiz Klassen)
Commissioned by: Consulate General of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Friday, Friday 29 September, 7:00pm
Agata Jaworska (Bureau Europa) and Jorn Konijn (This Must Be The Place)
Guido Giglio, Design Displacement Group
Gerjan Streng, BRIGHT | Cloud Collective
Q&A WITH CONSULATE
Anne Le Guellec, Dutch Consulate Toronto
Saturday, 30 September, 3:00pm
DEBATE #1: ALTERNATIVE MODELS IN CITY MAKING: PHILANTHROPY AND CROWDFUNDING
PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE
In a post-crisis context, crowdfunding has emerged as a small-scale, low-budget and non-bureaucratic alternative to city transformation. While it promises to democratise the process of city making, one can question how well the crowd - through promotional campaigns - can determine what is needed for the city. To what extent can crowdfunding offer a comprehensive solution to city making?
FEATURING: THE BENTWAY
CHARITY VS. POLITICS
The development of large-scale public parks can take years to realise, and do not always garner citizen support and engagement. Kickstarted by a philanthropic donation of $25 million, The Bentway is a planned public trail underneath the Gardiner Expressway. The project is changing the way the city is approaching public park development, and is leaving the government hopeful that more citizens will address the public realm through charitable donations.
Philanthropy in public parks can speed up the development process, and strengthen donor engagement in public space. However, charitable donations inevitably also serve the interests of the donor. To what extent do philanthropic organisations represent public interests rather than commercial or political ones? Is it possible to separate charity from politics?
Saturday, 7 October October, 3:00pm
DEBATE #2: SMART CITY VS. CITIZEN RESPONSIBILITY
20% of local governments indicate public safety as the priority when they invest in Internet of Things. Can smart cities offer a solution to public safety? Might there be unintended consequences? When public space is outfitted with technological devices, what happens to citizen responsibility?
Stratumseind is the largest bar street in The Netherlands, attracting approximately 15,000 visitors every weekend. It is an example of a crowded outdoor situation in which persons can lose self-control, get aggressive, and cross boundaries they would normally not cross. The project De-escalate develops interactive street lighting in order to manage potentially aggressive situations. It is an example of a smart city initiative aimed at improving public safety.
Undertaken by academic researchers in partnership with tech companies, the municipality and the police, De-escalate studies how technology can be used to manipulate crowds in the name of public safety. It is part of a growing momentum of governments adopting smart city initiatives, which may have unintended consequences. As public space is equipped with technological devices, citizens begin to feel that somebody else is responsible for the maintenance of order. The system may not be solving social problems but rather encouraging them to emerge somewhere else.
Sunday, 8 October, 3:00pm
DEBATE #3: INNOVATION IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY
Global consumption currently needs 1.5 planet Earths to sustain itself. The current ‘take, make and dispose’ model is not sustainable in the long run.
This discussion will unfold the need for structural innovation: stronger economic incentives, new ownership models, and international legislation (and their unintended consequences).
OWNERSHIP VS. STEWARDSHIP
Eight per cent of all energy consumption is currently used to produce metals worldwide. It could take far less energy to take the metals from existing buildings. The project PUMA explores Amsterdam as an urban mine, providing a glimpse of the potential for harvesting the vast stocks of metals – such as steel, copper and aluminum – that are present in the city. Could urban mining replace the current mining industry?
One could ask whether a house owner should own the resources contained within the house. In a circular economy, should we rather become stewards of the resources that we inhabit and use?
ECONOMY VS. ECOLOGY
FEATURING: ECO COIN (ALTERNATIVE CURRENCY)
Eco Coin is a digital currency rewarding people who are actively contributing to a more sustainable world. It strives to make the value of environmental resources explicit by economically compensating people who become stewards of environmental resources. By attributing economic value to environmental value, Eco Coin aims to break the cycle of the economic sphere feeding on the environmental sphere.
MARKET VS. INTERNATIONAL LAW
FEATURING: ECOCIDE (LEGISLATION)
Ecocide is the damage or destruction of ecosystems by human agency or by other causes. Drafted by British lawyer Polly Higgins, the Ecocide law is a proposed international law that would prohibit ecocide. Where ecocide occurs as a crime, remedy can be sought through national courts and the International Criminal Court.