According to Levy 'Collective intelligence' is a social project of varied intelligence, distributed, unceasingly developed and coordinated in real-time(1994). This definition is built upon four axioms: It is distributed: in the sense that nobody knows everything,everyone knows something; knowledge is in a community. It is unceasingly developed: Levy insists on the concept of human qualities; each member of a community is carrying a richness which would ensure a place and a contribution in collective intelligence. It is coordinated in real-time: the reference here is to cyberspace, to the semantic web in particular, a tool supporting collective intelligence and allowing communication between media on a large scale. Finally, it leads to an effective mobilisation of competences as collective intelligence is not a theoretical or philosophical concept , but it enables effective social organisation based on competences, knowledge and wisdom ( Caillard 2007). [1]
Collective intelligence is not purely a cognitive object. Intelligence must be understood here in its etymological sense of joining together (interlegere), as uniting not only ideas but people,
Collective intelligence is not purely a cognitive object. Intelligence must be understood here in its etymological sense of joining together (interlegere), as uniting not only ideas but people,
constructing society.[2]
With the rapid growth of telecommunications and information technologies, a number of open source software communities and alternative political organizations have appeared, enabling us to imagine an emergence of new forms of social, economic and political power wherein a common space is constructed by linking an infinetely diverse set of individual interests through shared projects or desires. Examples are political organizations fostered by networking technologies like moveon,org, but also user-generated organisations like the file-sharing communities of myspace and flickr or the online encyclopedia network Wikipedia. In these communities, participants operate from a variety of discrete locations spanning massive geographical distances via intensively reflexive feedback loops of communication and exchange. The participants are at once geographically and culturally apart from one another while also a part of a common space of endeavour. These communities not only rely on communication but also produce communicability, that is to say the generation of new information as a product, and platforms of exchange.[3]
Therefore, we can claim that those platforms of online exchanging knowledge, thoughts and ideas have become the immaterial 'forums' and common spaces of the 21st century capable of reshaping the material and physical attributes of the real urban public spaces.
source:https://neighborland.com/
Platforms like Neighborland, promote human centered uban design and give the power back to the people to take decentralised decisions and organise their community through this online communication space. Neighborland acts as a link for collaboration between organisations, residents, city agencies and universities for the organisation of local projects. People can suggest projects or submit ideas for events and other initiatives that have to do with the local community and get feedback and advice on how to find resources to implement them in the public space. People can also submit ideas on how to improve existing problematic issues concerning their proximal urban environment. Therefore an online, virtual and immaterial 'public space' becomes the lever triggering a change in the physical surroundings of public space and promotes a new way of taking decisions and a new form of public power on urban space not only controlled by institutional forces but appearing at the scale of the community of a city. Social networks can contribute to motivate and bring together members of the community so that they can reclaim the commons in new and innovative ways and organise new forms of political actions.
Another good example is Occupy Wall Sreet (http://occupywallst.org/) whose call of protest was initiated by the Canadian anti-consumerist pro-environment group/magazine Adbusters. In their site (https://www.adbusters.org/occupywallstreet/) users make suggestions about events or where they are going to perform and write their opinons freely, redefining the use of public space.
Another good example is Occupy Wall Sreet (http://occupywallst.org/) whose call of protest was initiated by the Canadian anti-consumerist pro-environment group/magazine Adbusters. In their site (https://www.adbusters.org/occupywallstreet/) users make suggestions about events or where they are going to perform and write their opinons freely, redefining the use of public space.
source: https://www.adbusters.org/occupywallstreet/
Another platform complementing the work of urban designers and planners, could be Planning 2.0 which "incorporates online geographic information system (GIS) mapping and web technologies to support collaborative planning and ongoing public participation. This enhances government transparency and accountability by creating a societal infrastructure for human interaction. Planning 2.0 helps us cast our net as far as possible to capture as much public feedback as needed and foster public involvement. This entails retooling our communities with effective means of communication that go way beyond the traditional civic engagement venues to a more open and capable dialog and transparent participation." as Ahmed Abukhater, Global Industry Manager for Community Development at Esri explains in Next American City magazine on how to shift from “planning for people” to “planning with people” using new technologies and platforms. Planning 2.0 has three levels of implementation: 1. Informing impacted and interested stakeholders, including the public, by disseminating information and maps using the GeoWeb as a common platform. 2.Involving members of the public by getting their feedback and quickly registering their preferences regarding planning initiatives, from broad issues such as community visioning to specific project-based proposals and land-use changes. This is enabled by crowdsourcing, through which citizens act as sensors and a source of geographic information and intelligence. 3.Empowering the public to make informed decisions about new and existing developments. By using the web, cloud computing, and open data-sharing policies as a platform to deliver geoservices, people are able to make decisions regarding what should and should not happen in their communities. This provides a collaborative platform that empowers both decision makers and everyday citizens. [4]
source: http://www.urenio.org/2011/01/20/planning-2-0-a-collaborative-platform-for-actionable-intelligence/
References
[1] N.Komninos, Intelligent Cities and Globalisation of Innovation Networks, Routledge, 2008
[2] C.Hight, C.Perry, 'Collective Intelligence in Design', Architectural Design September/October 2006, Wiley-Academy
[3] C.Hight, C.Perry, 'Collective Intelligence in Design', Architectural Design September/October 2006, Wiley-Academy
[4]P.Tsarchopoulos, 'Planning 2.0: Collaborative Platform for Intelligence', http://www.urenio.org/2011/01/20/planning-2-0-a-collaborative-platform-for-actionable-intelligence/
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου