Projects Envisioning an Urban Future No Longer Driven by Economic Growth

This is a descriptive translation of the original Dutch essay by Paul van den Bergh.

The Architecture Grant Scheme supports projects that contribute to the quality, development, or deepening of the field of architecture in the broadest sense. In recent years, the Creative Industries Fund NL has supported a number of projects that use design research to envision a new future for the Netherlands. Many of these projects approach (urban) space as a commons: something that is collectively managed and shared. This approach not only yields new insights but also workable alternatives to our current economic system, which is no longer sustainable, writes Paul van den Bergh. As a general framework for his analysis, he draws on the concept of the post-growth city, developed through the ongoing design research of BURA and Crimson.

Freedom to Think

The wealthiest one per cent of the world's population owns, consumes, and pollutes more than the poorest half, argues Selçuk Balamir, designer and lecturer at the Willem de Kooning Academy, in No such things as poverty. In this essay on the relationship between design and poverty, he contends that as long as the system we all participate in remains unchanged, poverty will persist. In the current system, collective forms of wealth that cannot be privately owned — such as clean air and water, the right to land, and freedom and equality between people and all other forms of life — remain out of reach for the vast majority.

If we want to design for a world without poverty, we must design beyond capitalism, Balamir argues: 'Unless design can imagine and usher in the end of capitalism, it cannot meaningfully realise any of its do-good ambitions.' How far from straightforward this is, is sketched by British cultural critic Mark Fisher. In 2008, he coined the term 'capitalist realism' to describe a widespread shared sense that capitalism is the only viable economic system and that imagining an alternative has become effectively impossible. According to Balamir, this capitalist realism produces a poverty of imagination in the design field. We cannot conceive of anything outside the current system, yet we can only give direction to change when the end goal is known. Our designs must therefore be both visionary and directional, because we have become entirely enmeshed in the systems we inhabit.

Post-Growth City: In Search of New Models

The Club of Rome demonstrated as far back as 1972 the limits of our growth model. Those limits are becoming increasingly visible in the Netherlands. For one of the most densely populated countries in the world, facing a shortage of almost one million homes, combined with a nitrogen crisis, rising sea levels, failing sustainability policy, and an impending energy transition, business as usual is simply not an option. If we accept the limits to growth as a given and prioritise wellbeing and sustainability over economic growth, what would the Netherlands look like?

The Post-Growth City (PGC) is the work-in-progress conceptual model developed by BURA and Crimson that offers a possible response to many of the national and global wicked problems we face. Post-growth stands for the preservation, or even growth, of broad prosperity (everything people value: material wellbeing, health, education, the environment and living conditions, social cohesion, personal development, and safety) without the negative impact that comes with the current economy of growth and consumerism. BURA and Crimson define the post-growth city as follows: 'A city or region that facilitates the growth of all activities and products that contribute to the regeneration of the ecosystem and improve social wellbeing, and that actively works to reduce all activities and products that have a negative impact on the environment and social wellbeing.'

Spatial planning was once a task for government, and housing construction the domain of urban planners and architects. But today, almost everything in our built environment has become a commodity or private property: housing, education, energy, healthcare, transport. Setting economic growth as a goal has led to perverse incentives and actions that do not serve our broad prosperity, yet have far-reaching consequences for utilities, healthcare, education, and housing. Key public utilities have been privatised; hospitals, schools, and housing associations have merged into large 'efficient' organisations, not with the aim of delivering better care or education, but to cut costs, with all the consequences that entails.

The PGC project is still in development; the end vision has not yet crystallised, and the analysis is not yet complete. Its aim is to develop new horizons and prescriptions that lie beyond our current system. A question that arose in my conversation with Mike Emmerik of Crimson is whether this city will, in built form, be substantially different from the city as it exists today. The project appears above all to be about social values. According to the researchers, the economy and urban development must be decoupled or fundamentally reorganised. Reducing taxes on labour and increasing taxes on raw materials and emissions could bring about such a shift. This would increase the value of existing property and make new construction more expensive. Renovation and repurposing would then become the rule rather than the exception. Waste would decrease sharply or disappear altogether; repair and repairability would become more important. The designer would thereby take on the role of steward and caretaker. This would bring about a different relationship with the city and its built environment. The shift in the tax burden would also have a positive effect on labour-intensive sectors such as healthcare, education, and manufacturing, while discouraging polluting sectors such as fast fashion, long-haul holidays, and the conventional meat and dairy industry. In the longer term, this would slow society down, with possible consequences including advances in social wellbeing, fewer burnouts, and more time and attention for one's immediate environment.

How we want to live M4H 2030: Affordable and Sustainable Area Development

Research into the post-growth city illustrates how spatial policy and economics have become deeply intertwined. The project Hoe wij willen wonen M4H 2023 (How we want to live M4H 2023) by the Keilecollectief, founded by the architects of Studio Adams and Group A, actively works to safeguard affordability and sustainable development, among other goals. The collective is independently investigating the existing spatial framework of the Merwe Vierhavens (M4H) area in Rotterdam and has taken on an active role in the area's development. Although neither the collective nor the framework explicitly uses the term post-growth city, both fit well within that conceptual framework. The M4H area is intended to make space for makers, the sharing of facilities, experimentation, the production and use of sustainable energy, and the valorisation of residual flows: all ingredients of the post-growth city.

The spatial framework, which sets out the main spatial and programmatic structure for the area, was vague about how its 'guiding principles' were to be achieved. Because it concerned their own backyard and because the development was running behind schedule, the collective decided to take an active part in shaping the thinking. Starting from historical research into the site, a discussion was opened on housing, working, and building. The Keilecollectief curated and organised an exhibition in which five existing exhibitions were brought together. These illuminated housing in the broadest sense: new legal structures and forms of client commissioning; the public and collective spaces in the network; the possible collective functions and the conditions needed to realise a cooperative building; the stories of the (new) users; and the sustainable ambitions of the area. A range of events were organised around the exhibition, including the launch of Operatie Wooncoöperatie, a manifesto for new housing cooperatives as an alternative to the stalled housing market.

Not least through its presence and this initiative, the Keilecollectief has become an important independent knowledge partner for the City of Rotterdam and other designers. It makes its spaces available for meetings and workshops - including for external parties and the municipality - and has in this way become involved as an expert in the development of the area. With the exhibition as a catalyst, the Keilepand has become the central meeting place for stakeholders to share knowledge and brainstorm. The project has since been followed up with Hoe wij willen werken M4H, and Hoe wij willen bouwen M4H is currently in development.

Co-Operate: Community Land Trusts as an Alternative

The project Co-Operate offers a glimpse of what post-growth cities can look like at community level, without explicitly using that term. The project provides a model for developing buildings and places beyond the capitalist model focused on short-term returns. Space and Matter (spatial and strategic design), We The People (social innovation), and New Economy (circular business models) took the existing Community Land Trust (CLT) H-Buurt in Amsterdam as their object of study, investigating how such initiatives can be shaped with the next seven generations in mind. The long-term agenda of the collective creates room for fundamentally different thinking about one-off costs, long-term costs, soft values, and community cohesion.

CLT H-Buurt in the Amsterdam Bijlmer consists of 110 participants working towards affordable new homes and community facilities. Through this collaboration, Co-Operate was able to test its ideas and findings directly (action-based research) and hold them up against the needs of its target group. Viewing the factor of time — the seven generations — from the perspective of this target group, the team drew on the 'layers of longevity', a concept developed by architect Frank Duffy, encompassing: stuff and furniture, interior and floor plan, services, exterior, structure, and location, supplemented by social aspects (how residents live, work, and use the buildings). The aspects of social interaction, location, and structure in particular are elements with a long time horizon, fitting the seven-generation framework. According to Co-Operate, long-term thinking brings economic, social, and sustainable values into better balance. Analysis of the H-Buurt yielded four transformative use cases: herbs and food, (environmental) comfort as a service, space for change, and cleaning and repair. These were further developed and their impact analysed over the seven generations.

Seemingly Impossible Heritage: New Value for Written-off Buildings

Schijnbaar onmogelijk erfgoed (Seemingly Impossible Heritage) is an example of a project grounded in post-growth principles that does explicitly contribute to an underlying open knowledge infrastructure. In this project, RAAAF investigates the possibilities that (precision) demolition offers as a spatial intervention to give written-off buildings new and unique value. Together with the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands (RCE), BPD, the Government Real Estate Agency, and the Province of South Holland, RAAAF sought out real estate for which demolition appears to be the only solution. For these buildings, new possibilities emerge as a result: ruin formation, partial demolition, and radical changes to their context. RAAAF's ambition is not to fill the existing void of seemingly impossible heritage, but to give it (greater) meaning.

With a startup grant from the Architecture Grant Scheme, and a portion of the subsequent project grant, RAAAF has mapped the many (precision) demolition techniques that, in their view, can be used to create new architecture. The resulting collection is poetic and almost endless. RAAAF organises the various demolition techniques into seven categories: (1) manual demolition, (2) automated demolition, (3) explosive demolition, (4) non-explosive demolition, (5) dismantlement, (6) accelerated natural decay, and (7) catastrophic destruction. Some methods, such as the wrecking ball (2), explosives (3), dismantlement (5), overgrowth (6), and burning down (7), speak for themselves. Others are intriguing discoveries and sometimes hover at the boundary of what constitutes demolition, which itself demonstrates the added value of the catalogue. These include 'peeling' (1) with hammer and chisel or chemical agents, lifting and relocating (5), insects (6), falling trees (6), and floods, freezing, failed implosions, and lightning strikes (all 7). What makes the catalogue remarkable is that it includes demolition methods ranging from highly precise and manual, to controlled but with potentially unexpected outcomes, to entirely uncontrollable. Not every demolition method results in complete destruction. Demolition can also expose or transform other parts of a building. With the demolition catalogue in hand, it becomes clear that there is no single perfect solution for every building earmarked for demolition. Scenarios and combinations can lead to new and extraordinary discoveries.

Alongside the demolition catalogue, RAAAF presents six concrete cases of apparently hopeless heritage. For an abandoned forensic psychiatric clinic in the rural village of Rekken, RAAAF proposes stripping the structure to a bare frame, cutting through it diagonally several times, and leaving it as a ruin for nature to reclaim. The region would thereby gain a unique public space, unlike anything else in the Netherlands in this form, where new nature development can run its course. Atlantik Wall is the designers' proposal for the concrete coastal fortifications built during the Second World War. RAAAF proposes excavating the bunkers and repositioning them elsewhere, tilted or stacked, thereby stripping them of their original violent intent and rendering them vulnerable. Under the name Church on the Move, RAAAF offers a radical solution for the many vacant churches in the Netherlands, of which between 300 and 500 are expected to be demolished in the coming decade. Relocating a church can give both the environment from which it is removed and the one in which it is placed a new layer of meaning. The Office is a proposal to use a wrecking ball to punch round holes through office floors, creating new spatial qualities. The resulting spaces are reminiscent of the work of New York artist Gordon Matta-Clark. RAAAF sees this brute form of demolition as a counterpoint to the businesslike and calculating precision construction, and the associated precision dismantlement, that is currently gaining ground for sustainability reasons. Chittagong is a fragment of a ship, 800 tonnes of steel, placed as an object in public space on the waterfront in Oostenburg, Amsterdam. It symbolises the wealth that international trade has brought us. After fifteen years, the object will be dismantled and sold, with the proceeds donated to workers in the ship-breaking yards of Bangladesh.

The final project, Black Water, was realised by RAAAF as a temporary installation. It takes place in one of the three silos of the now-closed sewage treatment plant on Zeeburgereiland in Amsterdam. RAAAF wanted to reveal the exceptional spatial quality of the silos, without them having to conform to the 'standard' of urban development. Through a series of interventions within the silo, a landscape emerges of reflections, ripples, and sound. Visitors enter the silo by crawling through a pipe. Once inside, they hear drops falling from the roof onto the surface of the water. The echo fills the space; the ripples in the water reflect the little light that enters the silo. The eyes adjust slowly to the darkness, while over the course of fifteen minutes a hatch in the roof is slid open millimetre by millimetre. The space becomes gradually more visible, more perceptible: a unique spatial experience. And yet the silos have turned out not to be impossible heritage after all. Their redevelopment is now well underway.

Architectuur onder Spanning: The Energy Transition in the Neighbourhood

Energy plays a major role in how we will shape our living environment in the future. On the one hand, we want (and must) save energy wherever possible — in industry, transport, and buildings. On the other, we are striving to generate the energy we use from clean sources. The transition to a fully electric society is now underway. Almost anyone can become an energy producer, primarily through solar panels. Energy generation is therefore increasingly taking place in a distributed, small-scale, and relatively unpredictable manner, requiring upgrades and a fundamental revision of our electrical infrastructure, the built consequences of which we will also see at neighbourhood level.

The research project Architectuur onder Spanning (Architecture Under Pressure) arose from a conversation involving, among others, grid operator Liander and the designers at Bright. Liander indicated that as many as four times the current number of medium-voltage substations (MSRs, commonly known as transformer boxes) might need to be installed for the Netherlands to transition from gas to electricity. Bright, with its expertise in urban development and the energy transition, anticipated problems: yet more competing claims on an already scarce public space.

Bright distinguishes three types of MSR, depending on their spatial context: integrated units, as are commonly used in new-build projects; relatively large walk-in MSRs that allow technicians to enter for maintenance; and the permit-free, non-walk-in MSRs that are serviced from the outside. Integrated units make no claim on public space, but they do on the building's ground floor plinth, so careful placement is required there too. The other two types do claim public space, partly due to the access requirements around them, and are therefore positioned as freestanding elements.

Transformer boxes were not always as sober and functional as we know them today. Until the Second World War, attention was paid to the role of electricity and to these structures within our (urban) fabric. After the war, they became increasingly standardised, industrial products, with only rare exceptions receiving a distinctive outer shell. Modifications to the standard product quickly make the box significantly more expensive. Bright therefore proposes MSR+ boxes that contribute to other urban challenges, such as biodiversity, sports infrastructure, or climate adaptation.

Bright has translated the placement of MSRs into a programming language for the geographic information system QGIS, enabling search areas for MSR placement to be retrieved in a semi-automated way. Based on the characteristics of these locations, the probability of success for a new MSR+ is then mapped using a decision tree. The insights from this study are being developed further in a number of contexts. Under the name Jeux de Joules, for instance, Bright is collaborating with other designers and the municipalities of Rotterdam and Amsterdam to develop concrete prototypes for transformer boxes. Together with Liander and the Amsterdam Economic Board, Bright is also exploring new typologies of urban hubs, with a focus on decentralised data centres as nodes in the urban energy and data network. Additionally, Bright is investigating whether the dimensions of the MSR can be further optimised.

Commons

The five projects described above give grounds for optimism that through design we can envision alternative futures worth rallying behind. What they share is an approach to (urban) space as a commons: something that individuals, large companies, and governments collectively manage and share.

Industrial capitalism runs on mass production using cheap labour in poor to mediocre conditions, and products protected by patents. A post-growth society, in which dismantlability, repairability, and care for what already exists, including care for one another, are central, requires a shift towards a more open-source society with a greater role for the commons. When we understand how products are made, how we can repair them, extend their lifespan, and eventually dismantle, reuse, or recycle them, we enter a post-growth scenario in which the existing is genuinely more valuable than producing something new. Post-growth requires open standards, collective ownership of designs, and a different attitude from consumers. Post-growth also requires more love and attention for objects, buildings, and the environment, as we see in all five projects.

Greater emphasis on, and initiative from, the commons also demands a different attitude from professional market parties and governments. Space and Matter's experience with community- and commons-based projects shows that such collectives are often perceived as less professional, because they are typically led by groups of volunteers. These kinds of initiatives are frequently undervalued because they are measured by the same standards as professional parties, even though they generally deliver greater social and ecological value.

Collective ownership also plays a role in the energy question. Sun and wind — while not evenly distributed everywhere — belong to us all. Architectuur onder Spanning shows how the energy transition is not merely a technical challenge. Linking the new and upgraded electricity network to charging infrastructure, sport, ecology, or even local data centres can also increase public support for the energy transition. A more local organisation of energy and data contributes to community ownership and resilience, which is why it was also one of the four transformative use cases of Co-Operate.

Within the professional community, too, much remains to be gained in terms of commoning. A great deal is researched, collected, and analysed, but relatively little is communicated and shared. Transcripts of conversations and interviews, digital drawings, datasets, and notes from books or articles read can be of great value to subsequent research by other designers. Sharing research data and methods will accelerate progress within the design community, save a great deal of (duplicated) effort, and give others more opportunities to build on and extend that research. Grant-making bodies such as the Creative Industries Fund NL could contribute to this by setting stricter conditions on what supported initiatives make available in open-source form, as Co-Operate does with the underlying spreadsheets, articles, and other data.

The designers and architects behind Post-Growth City, Hoe wij willen wonen M4H 2030, Co-Operate, Schijnbaar onmogelijk erfgoed, and Architectuur onder Spanning are, slowly but surely, giving shape to a post-growth society. It falls to us, as a professional community, to emphasise the importance of the commons and to nourish the concept with projects, ideas, research, data, and inspiration. Let us look beyond the systems we find ourselves in, work with what we have, repurpose what has been written off, and share what we discover and invent.

Paul van den Bergh is an architect, guest lecturer, and urban planning adviser at the Municipality of Voorschoten.