#Niki Frantzeskaki | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

ega-talks · 6 years ago

Video

youtube

Niki Frantzeskaki , Facilitating sustainable and resilient urban transitions

Niki Frantzeskaki holds a PhD on ‘Dynamics of Sustainability transitions’ from Delft University of Technology and is an Associate Professor on Sustainability Transitions’ Governance at DRIFT, Faculty of Social Sciences at Erasmus University Rotterdam.

FILMED IN ROTTERDAM, HOLLAND, 2018

EGA-TALKS is produced by Erik Giudice Architects: interviews with experts in the field of architecture, urbanism and related areas. EGA Talks is part of EGAs ongoing cross disciplinary research aiming to envision a sustainable future.

Resilience vs sustainability

The question that comes again and again, from people working in cities like urban planners and policymakers. Is that very few of them actually can see the difference between sustainability and resilience.

I think most of the times I get questions like. How different is resilience from sustainability?

I start with what is similar. They’re both concepts that require normative future visions for the cities. They already prescribed the way of a good future to live in. ”A sustainable resilient city” that is a very positive image to imagine.

They require transformations to how we are living, working, organizing and practicing. The difference is that resilience, is envisioning that you still have a functioning system, even after a surprise or a dreadful event.

This is the concept of resilience. It takes uncertainty into account in a very specific way. It can be very helpful to already anticipate and take onboard uncertainty even in high magnitude in your planning.

Sustainability is about having the integrative holistic view to take all the elements of life, the economy, the society and the environment into consideration. To not externalize one on the expense of the other. Both concepts work very nicely together.

From a recent project I concluded ”Resilient Europe” with URBACT. We worked together with 11 cities on how to build resilience in local neighborhoods. In very difficult locations.

We chose deprived neighborhoods. They had derelict infrastructure. The social networks were quite disrupted. Not very strong social ties or community ties, and lot of other issues such as abandoned green spaces or unappreciated green spaces.

From working with them, in experimental setups. I have some insights of what can make cities build stronger and resilient neighborhoods

1. Reestablish the connection of people with their own space.

The first insight is about reestablishing the connection of people with their own space. With where they live.

This is beyond the romantic understanding of the sense of place. It is more about the transformative element that space can have.

When people connect to it and they feel that: ”This is my home.” ”This is my location.” ”This is my city.”

Then they appreciate it. They manage it. They re-imagine it. That create, not only a positive social feeling and the social element of it.

It also push and a demand to the policy to have better infrastructure. To have infrastructure designed together with people and for people. That can strengthen the resilience of these locations. Together with the resilience of the cities.

2. How we understand resilience

A second insight is of how we understand resilience. It is not only about recovery. From a shock or a stress or a crisis or an unfortunate event of whatever magnitude.

But also how you can rebuild back your community. Your place. In a way to be thriving place again.

The understanding of what resilience means. Looking at it not as a recovery, but as a transformative concept itself. This is my second insight.

This does not only come from the view of the research, but also from the view of the inhabitants community.

3. Interconnections

A third element and I will summarize with this. Is how we see the interconnections. Interconnections between the people. Interconnection between the different knowledge. Interconnections between the different forms of solution and innovations that we see in the cities and how they can make cities more resilient.

Because it is also about rethinking the market. Rethinking the new local economies and how the local economies can also support the bigger city socio-economic transitions.

It is about how to empowering the people. To take ownership. To take stewardship onboard. How this can also create new economies and markets.

Sometimes we are being a little bit naive by looking on for instance green solutions. On fixing the green space. Making a neighborhood sustainable.

But then not taking the community with us. Taking the community with us, doesn’t only mean, to have empowerment workshops or trainings or walks to the city.

It also is about how they can feel more energetic. Feel more motivated and empowered to actually create their own small local economies and in this way, be part of this transformation of the places to become more resilient.

How do we frame this whole process in a way to be open to questions, to criticisms and to the innovations to be actually co-created?

I think going with predetermined solution, sometimes it might not work.

These deprived neighborhoods that we saw and worked together with. They’re exactly the evidence of of precooked solutions not working. We have neighborhoods in areas and in cities like Bristol and Glasgow. Where the city has done so much. So much work and so much thinking.

Still you see that it is not working. That is not because of bad policy or bad intentions or not going to the people.

But maybe going to the people with a different approach. In a different way. That is what is needed.

We are in a generation shift in the cities. A lot of people who are more on the strategic management level. They are in a different generation. They have a different training. They have been retrained to think about sustainability, because the priority.

Then the young people that are now just recruited. They’re very interdisciplinary. They really know what sustainability and resilient is. Because of their new training.

So they are more willing to experiment. To try new approaches. They don’t go to the public to consult them. Or to even school them.

They go with more open questions. They are in search continuously of new frame works or new approaches and that is quite encouraging.

That is opening up a completely different way of engaging with the cities. To go less as a regulator and to go more as a facilitator as an enabler.

As a person who is ready to search and find the solution and the innovation together with a person. Together with the community.

1 note · View note