• Informal
    Informal
  • Autoconstruction
    Autoconstruction
  • Libre
    Libre
  • Open source
    Open Source
Urbanisms in beta

News

Auto-Construction Redux: The City as Method

I am happy to report the publication of a new article, “Auto-Construction Redux”, in the latest issues of Cultural Anthropology. The journal is open access and the full text is available here: https://culanth.org/articles/923-auto-construction-redux-the-city-as-method

The article recuperates the concept of auto-construction as a heuristic for anthropological theory and method. Drawing on the concept’s original usage in urban studies, it suggests that auto-construction offers a handle for grasping not only how grassroots projects mobilize resources, materials, and relations in ways that are inventive and transformative of urban ecologies but that it also helps outline how theory itself is auto-constructed: the operations of problematization through which situations are navigated and designed into methods of inquiry and exploration. I read auto-construction, in other words, as both an empirical and theoretical descriptor, a sort of auto-heuristics for thinking of the city as method. The argument is illustrated by an ethnographic account of work with guerrilla architectural and countercultural collectives in Madrid, focusing in particular on the transformation of a vacant open-air site in the heart of the city into a self-organized community project, exploring how activists variously problematized the city as method.

To my delight, the folks at Cultural Anthropology have used one of the images of El Campo de Cebada in the text as the issue’s cover.

Political exhaustion and the experiment of street

We have recently published an article on the role of ‘exhaustion’ (fatigue and weariness but also ‘vacuum’) as an engine of political hope and assembly in the Spanish Occupy / 15M movement.

Specifically the essay describes the complex negotiations around stranger sociability, public space, and democratic knowledge that shaped the meetings of popular assemblies in the wake of the popular protests. The work of assembling was ‘exhausting’, by which participants would mean two things. In one sense, meetings would often turn into tiresome affairs, trying the patience and resilience of participants. In another sense, attendants would describe assemblies as spaces of political ‘exhaustion’, where politics as usual was emptied out and replaced by new democratic possibilities. We offer here an account of exhaustion as an ethnographic category. We are particularly interested in the role accorded to exhaustion as a vacuum enabling the appearance of novel social and political roles. We develop our argument by drawing a provocative analogy with the early history of scientific experimentation, where the nature of an ‘assembly’ of trusted peers and its location in genteel space became constitutive of a new type of experimental knowledge. What social and epistemic figures are popular assemblies bodying forth today?

You can access the article here [paywall]: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9655.12597/full

Or here [Researchgate]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315108371_Political_exhaustion_and_the_experiment_of_street_Boyle_meets_Hobbes_in_Occupy_Madrid

Open urban tools. A catalogue

The title ‘Open urban tools’ (in Spanish ‘Herramientas de ciudad abierta’) attempts to highlight a peculiar dimension of the civic urban projects that have proliferated in Madrid in the recent years: Community gardens, squatted social centres and occupied plots of vacant land that have spread throughout the city. Cornerstone to these projects has been the construction of a multifarious repertoire of tools: maps, urban archives, dérives, hand-made pieces of furniture, digital platforms… They compose a catalogue that we would like to suggest opens up city design to the participation of its inhabitants, something has been happening in other cities of Spain too.

I would like to give a few notes to contextualize the climate of political invention and urban creativity that has spread over Madrid in recent years, we could say that the projects that have proliferated are infused by this climate driving the re-imagination of the city. A paradigmatic project would be the Campo de Cebada, The Barley Field, a plot of vacant land located in the centric neighbourhood of La Latina, it has been self-managed by the neighbours for the last five years after they reach an agreement with the council. Although the project lacks any kind of funding (public or private), it has been able to construct a vibrant space full of activity: weekly cinema sessions are organized during the summer, concerts take place in the weekends and workshops of very different kind happen all the time. The project was awarded in 2013 by the Arts Electronica Festival and 2014 received the award of the Spanish Biennale of Architecture and Urbanism.

The Campo de Cebada is an exceptional project but it is not unique. Since 2008, more than 40 community gardens have been created in alegal or extra-legal occupations of vacant plots of land in Madrid. Some of them have been later legalized by the council after Madrid Urban Allotment Network (ReHd Mad) designed in collaboration with the council an act that was approved in 2015 paving the way for the expansion of these projects. I would like to outline three aspects of this particular form of urbanism because it offers us some clues on the kind of urban tools that have produced in these projects and their peculiarities. These three aspects are, namely: (i) The problematization of property regimes, (ii) the construction of open urban infrastructures and (iii) the production of precise and detailed forms of documentation and archival repositories.

i. Urban commons.
The property regime of our Western societies has been traditional organized following a dichotomised way of thinking that classifies anything in one of two categories: public or private. A large part of the urban projects and civic initiatives (iniciativas ciudadanas, as they are called) that have come to life in the last years invoke a different understanding of the property of public urban goods. It is sometimes described with the notion of open governance and the notion of the commons (in Spanish, procomún) to refer to these urban spaces.

The invocation to the commons evinces a distinctive aspect of these forms of urban occupation. For if squatting has traditionally been a practice of law transgression that makes of legal transgression a key instrument for its political practice, these other forms of squatting are occupied with the technical exploration of new legal mechanisms for the production of urban commons. Indeed, they have laid aside the traditional idiom of occupation (okupación) and has instead started to use the expression of liberation to refer to their forms of intervention in the city. The conceptual distinction between public and private categories furnishing our property regime is thus an object of experimentation in many of these projects.

These projects pose us a question: How could we re-imagine the governance of the city? A city that is not owned by private companies or only governed by the public administration, a city that turns into a commons, or using the Spanish concept: procomún. I do not have spaces to get into details, but very often this experimentation draws inspiration on Free Software. What Free Software did on the Internet inventing a robust legal architecture of licenses, many of these projects are trying to replicate in the urban space.

ii. Open urban infrastructures.
The projects like the Campo de Cebada or initiatives participating in the Madrid’s Network of Urban Allotments have all proceed equipping the urban space with humble infrastructures. Those civic initiatives take usually abandon spaces and unoccupied buildings, occupy them and by equipping them with infrastructures reintegrate these spaces into the circuitry of the city. The infrastructures equipping these spaces are constructed in open workshops where people with no expertise learn how to refurnish the public space with new capacities. City planning is not anymore a practice solely in the hands of traditional experts, on the contrary, it is now carried out by these urban dwellers taking part in these spaces of apprenticeship.

iii. Documentation and archives.
These infrastructures are not only auto-constructed by citizens, very often they are precisely documented in sketches, drawings and instructions. Driven by the idea that those experiences could be reproduced in other places, there is a great effort put in the documentation of designs, methodologies, techniques, etc. Very often, free software is explicitly stated as a source of inspiration for this documentary practices that not only auto-constructs the city but produce the instructions to reproduce it. Large amounts of information are made public in these forms of intervention in the city. Methodologies of different kinds are documented on the Internet, designs of infrastructures are uploaded to archives and the data produced is shared on open repositories. Sometimes this documentation takes the form of maps, in other occasions it takes the shape of archives that recount the story of the city anew.

The initiatives proliferating in Spain have thus produced a series of tools that open up information (maps, archives, catalogues, repositories…) and at the same time information that attempts to open up tools. There seem to be a sustained effort to explore how to open the source of the urban infrastructures that are produced in the auto-construction of the city. It takes the form of manuals of instructions that are published under creative commons licence that allow anybody to replicate the designs.

Certainly, the occupation of spaces and the construction of community gardens is nothing new, but I think that the last aspect I have mentioned, the production of manuals, instructions, how-to-guides and a variegated forms of documentation that instruct auto-construction bear witness to the distinctive dimension of the urbanism emerging in Madrid: An urban imagination that is sourced by the liberating impulse of free software. This particular form of urbanism materializes the encounter of two different sensibilities: one represented by the insurgent practice of autoconstruction and another one infused by the liberating impulse of Free Culture. The outcome is a particular urban sensibility driven by a pedagogical impulse. A form of urbanism that not only auto-constructs the city but looks for the sources to auto-instruct the urban fabric.

 

For those who didn’t have the chance to attend to the session, here you can find the slides of the presentations:

Introduction. The free city: an urban encounter between open source and auto-construction (PDF). Adolfo Estalella and Alberto Corsín Jiménez (Urbanisms in beta).

CIVICS.es. Agenda ciudadana de acontecimientos urbanos, Vivero de Iniciativas Ciudadanas (PDF), Alejandro Zappala Delgado.

Civic Tech Manifest: CivicWise (PDF), Domenico Di Siena.

Archivo TAZ (PDF), Todo por la praxis.

Saberes que son poderes. Una ciudad de manual (PDF), Zuloark / Ciudad Huerto.

Senyalem la Memòria (PDF), Territoris Oblidats.

Caseando. Nuevos espacios colectivos desde la vivienda (PDF), Vivero de Iniciativas Ciudadanas.

Micos Projet: educational facilities as strategic elements for urban regeneration (PPT), PEZ Arquitectos.

Marco común para la cesión de espacios ciudadanos, Red de Espacios Ciudadanos (REC) (PDF).

A catalogue of open urban tools

Wednesday, 25 May 2016, 4pm – 8pm. Medialab-Prado (Madrid). Democratic City Meeting.

City maps, urban archives and dérives, hand-made pieces of furniture, citizen infrastructures, digital platforms and city drafts… These are tools that renew our relationship to the urban environment. We have witnessed in recent years how civic initiatives have re-wired, refurbished and instructed urban space through open urban tools.

Civic initiatives and activist projects have mobilized these projects to transform wasteland into gardens and turn abandoned buildings into houses for cultural innovation. Plots of land that were previously excluded from the circuitry of the city have been reintegrated into the urban fabric in a promising condition: hinting at the city yet to come. This session brings together a catalogue of tools that open up the city to the participation of its inhabitants, tools that liberate the pedagogic condition of the city. We call them a catalogue of open urban tools.

The session will pose for discussion a simple question: What is an open tool? Or perhaps it would be more accurately to say: How do we open an urban tool? We would like to ask about the type of documentation through which tools are opened (manuals, instructions, drafts, sketches, documentary files, visual narratives…). We will also consider the physical and digital infrastructures that keep this information public (digital platforms, discussion groups, meeting spaces and online forums…). Ultimately, we would like to explore the physical and documentary sources that help open the city to urban dwellers.

Session participants include Ciudad Escuela; Domenico di Siena; Vivero de Iniciativas Ciudadanas (VIC); Pez Estudio; Puesto En Construcción (PEC); Red de Espacios Ciudadanos (REC); Territoris Oblidats; Todo por la Praxis; and Zuloark.

The session is organised by Urbanism in beta in collaboration with the IX Meeting of Arquitecturas Colectivas (https://arquitecturascolectivas.net/noticias/aacc-madrid-herramientas-para-una-ciudad-en-abierto).”

Program. A catalogue of open source city tools (PDF).

PROGRAM

First session. 16.00 – 18.00 [English]

Introduction. The free city: an urban encounter between open source and auto-construction. Adolfo Estalella y Alberto Corsín Jiménez (Urbanisms in beta), Diego Peris (Todo por la praxis).

Ciudad Escuela (The city as a school): an open source urban pedagogy, Alberto Corsín Jiménez (Urbanisms in beta).

CIVICS.es. Agenda ciudadana de acontecimientos urbanos, Vivero de Iniciativas Ciudadanas, Alejandro Zappala Delgado.

Civic Tech Manifest: CivicWise, Domenico Di Siena.

TPC, Todo por la praxis.

Debate / Discussion (English and Spanish).

Descanso / Break

Second session. 18.00 20.00 [Spanish]

Saberes que son poderes. Una ciudad de manual, Zuloark / Ciudad Huerto.

Senyalem la Memòria, Territoris Oblidats.

Homing. Nuevos espacios colectivos desde la vivienda, Vivero de Iniciativas Ciudadanas.

Micos Projet: educational facilities as strategic elements for urban regeneration, PEZ Arquitectos.

Marco común para la cesión de espacios ciudadanos, Red de Espacios Ciudadanos (REC).

Debate / Discussion (English and Spanish).

Ethnography: a prototype

What happens to the ethnographic method when it goes open source? We are delighted to announce that an article describing our long term collaboration with ‘free culture’ architectural collectives, artists and activists in Madrid – Zuloark, Basurama, lagaleriademagdalena, Ciudad Escuela – has just been published by Ethnos.

We leave you with the article’s abstract below, as well as links to the paywall and pre-print versions.

Abstract

The article describes a long-term collaboration with a variety of free culture activists in Madrid: digital artists, software developers and guerrilla architectural collectives. Coming of age as Spain walked into the abyss of the economic crisis, we describe how we re-functioned our ethnographic project into a ‘prototype’. We borrow the notion of prototype from free culture activism: a socio-technical design characterised by the openness of its underlying technical and structural sources, including for example access to its code, its technical and design specifications, and documentary and archival registries. These ethnographic prototypes functioned as boundary objects and zones of infrastructural enablement that allowed us to argue with our collaborators about the city at the same time as we argued through the city. Providing a symmetrical counterpoint to the actions of free culture hackers elsewhere in the city, our anthropological prototypes were both a cultural signature of the radical praxis taking place in Madrid today and its expressive infrastructure.

Links

Pre-print: http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/131943/1/ethno_prototype_151202_rvsd_nfc_maindocument%20REVISION%202.pdf

Paywall: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00141844.2015.1133688?journalCode=retn20

Open source urbanism after the Pritzker Prize

The news that the Pritzker Prize winner Alejandro Aravena has liberated the architectural designs of four of his housing projects has made the headlines (for example here and here).

For Aravena’s studio, Elemental, the decision flags a wider and more ambitious turn: they are hereby making “the ABC of incremental housing public knowledge” (see http://www.elementalchile.cl/projects/abc-of-incremental-housing/).

As they see it, incremental housing outlines the future of an “open system” for urban planning, for which these four designs offer an  “open source that we hope will be able to rule out one more excuse for why markets and governments don’t move in this direction to tackle the challenge of massive rapid urbanization.” The designs are available for download here.

That a Pritzker Prize winner such as Alejandro Aravena talks about “open systems” and “open source” urbanism is very good news. But making one’s technical designs available for download does not, however, amount to open source urbanism.

We would like to take this opportunity to sketch out some of the divergences, but also potential openings, between Elemental’s idealization of open source urbanism and a more realistic implementation. Let us go one step at a time:

1. Aravena has made his designs available for download on Elemental’s website.

2. However, making your designs “available for download” is not the same as “opening access” to them. To “open access” requires unlocking the intellectual property rights that apply to any design.

The designs that Elemental has made available for download do not seem to have any legal license attached to them. Therefore it remains unclear what their copyright status is and, as a consequence, what one can do with them and on what terms.

Insofar as Elemental has claimed that the designs are now “public knowledge” we can presume they mean to say they are in the “public domain”. In other words, Aravena/Elemental have decided to let go the intellectual property rights over their designs: we can modify the designs as we please, as well as use them in both commercial and non-commercial ways.

3. The designs are available as .dwg files, which are the native file format for AutoCAD data files. AutoCAD is proprietary software (and rather expensive at that).

4. Insofar as engineering CAD files require a specific software and knowledge to be used, these designs will remain unintelligible and unworkable to most of the people who might ever find themselves in the position of building their own houses.

5. The designs, therefore, whilst free to download do not in fact problematize the expert and governance systems on which urban planning rests: why some people can “do” design whilst others cannot, who are the experts that get to say (and on what authority) what counts as a design system, etc.

6. We start to see the difference, then, between “free to download” and “open source”.

A truly “open system” for urban designs requires problematizing what “design” means for every community project: what languages of description are inscribed in a design system, what gets recognized as “expertise”, whose competence and skills and knowledge get enlisted into the project, for what purpose and in what contexts, etc.

We have written at some length elsewhere on the various challenges that open source urban projects are likely to face in actual practice, but let us briefly recapitulate some of the issues here:

(i) We have seen how making technical systems available for download does not guarantee their actual use by communities. People may lack the machine technology or knowledge to read or understand particular design files or languages. This does not mean they may not make reasoned decisions and pass expert judgment if they are given the opportunity to become part of the design system.

Therefore, part of the work of any open source urban project will often involve exploring novel visual and iconographic languages through which to make design objects and systems intelligible and usable by those who have never seen or worked with architectural technical drawings before.

The work of the Argentine guerrilla communication group Iconoclasistas offers one such example. Iconoclasistas have long been working in the production of Creative Commons licensed ideograms (pictograms) to facilitate storytelling and cartographies of particular community problems and concerns.

Pictogramas by Iconoclasistas http://www.iconoclasistas.net/properties/picto-2015/

 

(ii) Sometimes it is not enough to have access to specific design files, nor to be fluent in the (visual) languages of a design project. Sometimes keeping a log of how these various files and documentary registers change over time is crucial. It is not the files that are important, then, but the archives wherein these files are lodged.

An open source archive helps us see how people have been using its design files, whether they have made changes to them, whether they have used the original designs and developed or extended their original functionalities, etc. The archive keeps track of all such extensions and bifurcations. Such archives work therefore as permanent yet ever-changing infrastructures for the political capacities of the city. We may think of them more amply as repositories for the stories that the city tells about itself.

A marvelous prototype of what an urban archive might look like is the online repository of Inteligencias Colectivas.

 

Captura de pantalla 2016-04-11 a las 14.13.28

Inteligencias Colectivas home screen, http://www.inteligenciascolectivas.org/

 

(iii) As noted above, designing an open source urban project will also require confronting the expert and authorial regimes that underwrite the governance of urban projects: Who gets to speak on behalf of whom and on what authority? For example: Who can sign-off and “certificate” an infrastructural installation? Who assumes public liability insurance over a project? What does “responsibility” mean for any particular urban project? What kind of agency or political subjects are singled-out as “responsible” in each case?

When design is re-distributed among a complex alliance of stakeholders, the location and distribution of responsibility is also affected. Responsibility is not something exterior to design, something that can be adjudicated a priori or a posteriori, nor something that is prescribed de jure according to pre-assigned roles. Responsibilities must be made explicit, often drawn together as part of a problematic. Thus, the requirements that any project obliges its stakeholders to are part and parcel of its design system.

(iv) Open source urban projects test the limits of the city as an administrative unit, confronting numerous bureaucratic and institutional trials over legal permits, public liability insurance, tenure rights over public land holdings, access to electricity and water, waste disposal, etc.

Designing an open source urban system will therefore inevitably require opening-up and designing new spaces and forums of political interlocution, enabling local administrations, civic organizations and local communities to meet each other outside established frameworks of political bargaining. In this sense, the work of politicking is not something that one does before the “real” work of design gets started. An open source urban project involves designing the “wheres” and “hows” of political interlocution and engagement too.

One excellent example of a design project that took the architecture of political interlocution into consideration is the Madrid-based initiative Citykitchen.

(v) These projects face chronic funding and financial challenges, due for the most part to their disruptive, uncertain and illegal status. If the market and the state are no longer to be expected to play a role in the challenges of rapid urbanization (as Elemental note in their ABC), where will the money or the resources come from?

Of course communities have learned over the years to exploit all kinds of financial openings and opportunities, such as tapping into credit and barter economies, re-circuiting local communities’ basic material, recycling or waste management systems, local patronage or community sponsorship, etc. Such economies are therefore also central to an open source urban system.

In a nutshell, then, if we are serious about thinking of urban projects as open source ecologies we must attend to the complex dynamics of experimentation and self-organization impinging on their governance, expert and authorial regimes, cooperative economies, media and languages of description, methods of problematization, and systems of political engagement, to name but a few of the challenges facing these projects. Making architectural designs available for download is a welcomed but otherwise rather small first step in a very long journey.