The ‘Grand Challenges’ of our times, like climate change, resource depletion, global inequity, and the destruction of wildlife and biodiversity can only be addressed by innovating cities. Despite the options of tele-working, tele-trading and tele-amusing, that allow people to participate in ever more activities, wherever they are, people are resettling in cities at an unprecedented speed. The forecasted ‘rurification’ of society did not occur. Technological development has drained rural society from its main source of income, agriculture, as only a marginal fraction of the labour force is employed in agriculture in the rich parts of the world. Moreover, technological innovation created new jobs in the IT and service sectors in cities. Cities are potentially far more resource efficient than rural areas. In a city transport distances are shorter, infrastructures can be applied to provide for essential services in a more efficient way and symbiosis might be developed between various infrastructures. However, in practice, urban infrastructures are not more efficient than rural infrastructures. This paper explores the reasons why. It digs into the reasons why the symbiotic options that are available in cities are not (sufficiently) utilised. The main reason for this is not of an economic nature: Infrastructure organisations are run by experts who are part of a strong paradigmatic community. Dependence on other organisations is regarded as limiting the infrastructure organisation’s freedom of action to achieve its own goals. Expert cultures are transferred in education, professional associations, and institutional arrangements. By 3 concrete examples of urban systems, the paper will analyse how various paradigms of experts co-evolved with evolving systems. The paper reflects on recent studies that identified professional education as the initiation into such expert paradigms. It will thereby relate lack of urban innovation to the monodisciplinary education of experts and the strong institutionalised character of expertise. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63007-6_43 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/karelmulder/
MULTIFILE
New Dutch agrifood business models are emerging in response to economic, social and ecological pressures: new players arrive, new logistical pathways come to the fore and innovative consumer and farmer relationships – food coöperatives – are forged. How do new business models relate to reconfiguring the Dutch agrifood system? Our research combines future exploration (backcasting) and analysis of new business models. We developed three agrifood transition scenarios with various groups of stakeholders. For each scenario, we then analysed a specific, representative business model to explore the different roles of business models in agrifood transition. Business models in the “Added value in and with the countryside” already exist and occupy a niche in the market. However, a breakthrough of these business models require large-scale institutional and behavioural change. Business models in the “New products, specific markets” exist but are rare. They usually concern high-value specialist products that could result in widespread market change, but might require little institutional change. The “Sustainable production methods” most resembles the current system. Some associated business models become successful, but they have difficulty distinguishing themselves from conventional produce, which raises questions about whether business models are able to drive a transition in this direction. Thus, our results lend credence to the hypothesis that different transition pathways offer specific potential for and requirements of new business models.
MULTIFILE
My research investigates the concept of permacomputing, a blend of the words permaculture and computing, as a potential field of convergence of technology, arts, environmental research and activism, and as a subject of future school curricula in art and design. This concept originated in online subcultures, and is currently restricted to creative coding communities. I study in what way permacomputing principles may be used to redefine how art and design education is taught. More generally, I want to research the potential of permacomputing as a critical, sustainable, and practical alternative to the way digital technology is being taught in art education, where students mostly rely on tools and techniques geared towards maximising productivity and mass consumption. This situation is at odds with goals for sustainable production and consumption. I want to research to what degree the concept of permacomputing can be broadened and applied to critically revised, sustainable ways of making computing part of art and design education and professional practice. This research will be embedded in the design curriculum of Willem de Kooning Academy, focused on redefining the role of artists and designers to contribute to future modes of sustainable organisation and production. It is aligned with Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences sectorplan masters VH, in particular managing and directing sustainable transitions. This research builds upon twenty years of experience in the creative industries. It is an attempt to generalise, consolidate, and structure methods and practices for sustainable art and design production experimented with while I was course director of a master programme at WdKA. Throughout the research I will be exchanging with peers and confirmed interested parties, a.o.: Het Nieuwe Instituut (NL), RUAS Creating 010 kenniscentrum (NL), Bergen Centre for Electronic Arts (NO), Mikrolabs (NO), Varia (NL), Media Arts department at RHU (UK), Media Studies at UvA (NL).
