Talkin’ bout futures


Photo by Lex te Loo.

I had the pleasure of participating as a panelist in two BK Talks: a series of talks organized by TU Delft’s Faculty of Architecture.

The first session was titled ‘Apocalypse: An agenda for a World in Crisis‘, and can be viewed here. Other participants included Stavros Kousoulas, Felix Madrazo, Pinar Sefkatli, and Naomi Stead, and it was moderated by Lisa Doeland.

The secular use of the metaphor of ‘Apocalypse’ refers to the total destruction and end of the World, and originates from the last biblical book, ‘The Book of Revelation’. Whether or not the end of the World is coming is difficult to predict. However, when we read the newspapers or watch the news, the term ‘Apocalypse’ helps to describe the situation in which our Planet is at the beginning of the Anthropocene: climate breakdown, biodiversity loss, societal inequity, political unrest – to name just a few of the urgencies – can make us feel the fear of impending doom.

Nonetheless, this BK Talks is an invitation to address these urgencies with the belief that humankind will prevail. Moderated by Lisa Doeland, philospher and professor at Radboud University, Nijmegen and the University of Amsterdam, a panel of experts from different disciplines will discuss emergencies and agendas to tackle climate, justice or biodiversity emergency.

Can we speed up official agendas? Can we as citizens do more, faster? How can we reach true social and ecological justice? How can we address rampant urbanisation, overpopulation, migrations, aggressive misogyny, imperialism, white supremacy, capitalist exploitation of the Earth or an artificial intelligence takeover?

Can we refer to the actual meaning of ‘Apocalypse’ (from the Greek apokálupsis: “uncover, disclose, reveal”) and elaborate on the guidelines of actions to follow?

We need to do so. We are running out of time.



Photo by Lex te Loo.

The second session was titled, ‘Probable, Plausible, Preferable, Possible: Imagine the future before it is too late‘, and can be viewed here. Other participants included Jesse Hoffman, Félix Madrazo, Angeliki Sioli, and Heidi Sohn, and it was moderated by Chris Marcinkoski.

Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby’s Speculative Everything characterized speculative design as a form of creative practice concerned with elaborating design projects that imagine possible futures not as a form of prognostication, but as a means of identifying and reflecting upon crucial issues facing contemporary culture and society—whether we recognize them or not.

In this edition of BK Talks—moderated by Prof. Christopher Marcinkoski of the University of Pennsylvania—we will consider the utility of speculation as a tool of critical practice; the use of systemic methodologies as a means to think about the future; and the elaboration of scenarios in order to gain insight into actions we might take in the present. We will contemplate work that departs from both large-scale systemic drivers of change and weak signals emerging at the margins.

What forces affect the future? Is there even such a thing as the future, or are there only futures—in multiple? Can we truly prepare for imminent realities and anticipate impending needs? Are designers of the built environment stunted in their capacity for imagining and elaborating worlds other than what we know today? What might be considered legitimate methods of futuring? Is it possible to know and anticipate probable, plausible, possible, or preferable futures in view of the myriad planetary crisis of the 21st century?

We certainly cannot know what the future will bring. But we can no doubt imagine what it might.

Co-Designing Urban Futures with the Public at AMS conference

I’m delighted to moderate a special session during the upcoming AMS conference Re-Inventing the City.

The session (Thursday, Feb.17 at 15:00, online) will bring together artists, designers and researchers to consider how the public can be meaningfully brought into urban transition initiatives. The point of departure for the session is that efforts to transform urban systems often neglect to include the public, resulting in urban futures (and technologies) that are envisioned and created in a top-down matter by industry and government.

The conference’s call for papers (especially the theme “co-designing the system”) is evidence of this, mentioning “Science, industry partners and policymakers” but not the public (neither as organizations, nor as communities or individuals). The session will gather multiple perspectives on the roles the public can and should play in envisioning and promoting urban futures, with an emphasis on creative, imaginative or speculative approaches for urban co-creation. Such approaches serve to promote equitable public inclusion in urban development processes, while aiming to “stretch” the public’s imagination of how the city may take shape in the future.

I’ll be joined by Kars Alfrink, designer and PhD candidate at TU Delft, Cristina Ampatzidou, researcher at RMIT Europe and CreaTures project, Michiel de Lange, Assistant Professor, Culture and Media Studies at Utrecht University, and Julien Thomas, interdisciplinary artist and social designer.

Interview with Responsible Sensing Lab

As part of Alternative Imaginaries for the Smart City‘s expansion to Amsterdam, I was interviewed for the Responsible Sensing Lab‘s website. The lab, a collaboration between the Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions (AMS) and the City of Amsterdam’s Chief Technology Office (CTO), “explores how to integrate social values in the design of sensing systems in public space”.

This is how I described the motivation for the project:

The idea behind the project is that so much smart city technologies are designed and then deployed in a top-down manner. So it’s either industry or governments that have either a particular technical interest or a particular managerial interest; and they develop technology that ends up in the neighbourhoods and affects people’s lives.

We are trying to see if we reverse that order, if we work from the bottom-up, that would result in different types of sensing technologies and different types of metrics (what we decide to measure). So on the one hand our desire with this project is to engage the public in questions around what is measured and how.

The interview also features Bob Pannebakker who did the ethnographic research in the neighbourhood (Waterlandpleinbuurt in North Amsterdam). It can be read here.

Urban imaginaries at MAB2020

Biennale. Such a sexy word. I always wanted to be part of one and so I was delighted when the opportunity to organize and speak in a symposium on urban imaginaries during the Media Architecture Biennale (MAB 2020) came my way – even if the event was postponed by more than half a year and ended up taking place online.

The City Otherwise: Urban Imaginaries in Art and Design, featured four amazing speakers: Cristina Ampatzidou, Ollie Palmer, Tara Karpinski, and Maarten Hajer. We offered different perspectives on the question of how artists and designers engage with urban imaginaries as a means to democratize urban futures. This is how I introduced the panel on the biennale’s website:

Urban scholars have increasingly turned to urban imaginaries as a concept with which to interrogate the complex relations between the city’s materiality and the experiences of its inhabitants. The urban theorist Edward Soja describes urban imaginaries as “the mental or cognitive mappings of urban reality and the interpretative grids through which we think about, experience, evaluate, and decide to act in the places, spaces, and communities in which we live”. Urban imaginaries not only capture the way city dwellers make sense of their environment, but they provide a valuable means to consider urban entanglements. As Christoph Lindner and Miriam Meissner explain in their introduction to the Routledge Companion to Urban Imaginaries (2019), urban imaginaries “meaningfully interlink the different structures and signs, minds and bodies, facts and subjectivities, actualities and virtualities, economies and ecologies of urban social space”. In this sense, considering urban imaginaries allows researchers to start unpacking the richness of the urban lifeworld.

Urban imaginaries, “our situated and city-centric consciousness”, to cite Soja again, draw from multiple sources, including the cultural circulation of urban images, the everyday practices of city dwellers, and the technologies that mediate them. While the growth of cities has always coincided with the introduction of new technologies into the urban fabric, this process seems to have reached new heights with the rise of the smart city. Networked sensors and the algorithms they feed figure largely in the way cities are imagined and managed, revealing the smart city as an urban imaginary per excellence – a container for innovation and a platform for envisioning urban futures. This, however, raises important questions about who gets to imagine the smart city, and how a plurality of urban forms and configurations may break through the homogeneity of smart city technologies and policies. The role of artists and designers seems especially pertinent here.

Taking at its point of departure the assumption that urban imaginaries and, by extension, the public imagination are central to urban politics, the symposium will explore the relations between urban imaginaries and urban futures. Drawing from art and design projects, research and activism, symposium speakers will engage with such issues as the value of urban imaginaries as sites of collective creativity; the functioning of urban imaginaries as boundary objects that bring into dialogue the social sciences, arts and humanities; the usefulness of urban imaginaries as a means to interrogate and problematize the drive to quantify everyday urban life; and the value of urban imaginaries as windows into the political role of art and design.