Circularity aims to make waste obsolete by both closing and narrowing resource loops and by extending the lifespan of materials and products. This fundamentally different approach to construction practices necessitates a completely different method of organising the construction process. The rounds of decision-making undertaken by different actors at particular moments in the construction process have a significant role to play in this regard. Consequently, this research aims to analyse current circular practices for both the multi-actor environment and the decision-making process. An analytical framework is developed based on the theoreticallyinformed assumption that actors are responsible for decision-making and that circular strategies are an effective means through which to integrate circularity within the construction process. This analytical framework is applied to three circular building cases in the Netherlands, by drawing upon stakeholder interviews and documentation. It can be concluded that: some conventional actors have acquired knowledge on circularity; and that there is an emergent group of expert actors specialising in circularity. Both types of actors are a prerequisite for implementing circular strategies at both the beginning and end-of-life phase of a building; and should be involved early on to influence decision-making on circularity, especially concerning the longlived layers of a building.
Digitization and datafication of public space have a significant impact on how cities are developed, governed, perceived and used. As technological developments are based upon political decisions, which impact people’s everyday lives, and from which not everyone benefits or suffers equally, we argue that ‘the smart city’ should be part of continuous public debate; that it should be considered and treated as a social problem. Through nine focus groups, we invited respondents to explore and discuss instances and dilemmas of the smart city. We investigated which interpretative repertoires they used to frame the smart city as a social and actionable problem. Following Blumer's and Gamson's theories on the social construction of problems and on collective action frames, we assessed respondents’ discursive interpretations and their subjective construction of their senses of injustice, agency and identity regarding this subject. We find that – in the context of the city of Rotterdam in The Netherlands – citizens do not experience and consider the smart city as a social and actionable problem. Although they do associate the technological development of smart cities with potential threats, this does not change or constrain their sense of ‘actionability’, nor their behaviour, as they consider themselves to be powerless individuals regarding what, in their eyes, is a complex, elusive and inevitable situation they are confronted with. Strikingly, rather than specifically and contextually reflecting on smart city issues, respondents tended to express their concerns in the more general context of digital and data technologies invading everyday life.
In response to increasingly deterministic and all-encompassing implementation of smart city technologies, scholars and activists plea for policies and initiatives to support citizens’ democratic ‘Right to the Smart City.’ Although it is common for government officials and technology companies to make an effort to support citizen participation in smart city development, the question is how this works in practice. The authors engaged in a series of three participatory action research projects with the aim to support citizens’ ‘Right to the Smart City’ through the development and use of digital platforms. We find that, although (the processes of co-creatively developing) these platforms do actively address citizens’ engagement, empowerment and emancipation in smart city development, their contribution to provide participants with the opportunity to actually and sustainably reframe, reimagine and remake the smart city in a way that benefits them and their communities, is fairly limited. We conclude that time and budget constraints, entrenched technocratic beliefs, as well as vested – traditional – and imbalanced power relationships and divergent views, concerns and objectives prohibit citizens’ ‘Right to the Smart City.’ Hence, our plea for ‘Governance Beyond Participation:’ city making processes that do not perceive citizens as participants or clients, but as valued and trustworthy collaborators in the development and the governance of public space.
Academics have decried the erosion of public space under the neoliberal practices that have taken root since the 1980s in cities around the world. However, it is unclear whether users are concerned about the ownership of the urban spaces they use. To find out, this study surveyed users and observed their behaviour in three types of public spaces in Liverpool, UK: one entirely private development, one public-private partnership, and one urban renewal project taken over by a grassroots organization. The findings indicate that users appreciate privatised areas for the pleasant, clean, and safe environment they offer, as well as for the socialising opportunities. At the same time, privatised spaces send subtle signals to users that certain activities, people, or behaviours are not tolerated or encouraged. To reinforce the democratic essence of public space, values of appropriation should be safeguarded in all types of urban spaces, including privately produced ones.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.