Relational User Attribute Inference in Urban Space by FHL Architects

RELATIONAL USER ATTRIBUTE INFERENCE IN URBAN SPACE

Haeam Jung

The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL MArch Urban Design Urban Design Report Tutor: Nuria Alvarez Lombardero Word Count: 5,022 18 July 2018

Relational User Attribute Inference in Urban Space

Special thanks to Nuria Alvarez-Lombardero for her supervision.

ABSTRACT The contents of this essay are embodied in the design project ‘Prosthetic Ecologies’, which applies the concepts of empathy and the urban commons, in the context of city spaces and the relationships formed within those spaces. The spatial experience encompasses the notion of the urban place, the social space as a social product, and the concept of potential space extended from this fixed entity. This essay explains the potential, fluidity, and moving concept of a living body in a ‘hybrid space’ through locations such as a house or city where the boundaries of the space become meaningless. This is characterized by recognizing architectural space as an open object and inducing the openness of ‘the third space’. It is not the space between the inside and the outside but the boundary in between. It is completely open, but not infinite, and is an unpredictable living space concept.

In order to explain this theory, the essay mentions Elizabeth Grosz’s concept of space which encompasses the ideas of Gilles Deleuze and Henri Bergson. It emphasizes the formation of relations that can be read in various contexts by expanding on the concept of space, describing mutual interactions. In addition, it understands empathy and shared space in terms of relations and redefines the applied urban space. ‘Relational Aesthetics’, which is understood as interrelated human relationships, enables flexible thinking and the social acceptance of art, and can emphasize the process and social context of the formation of relations. Therefore, this design project aesthetically reexamines the relationship between the space of life and the formation of everyday life in the relationship of empathy based on mutual trust. It is meaningful that the creation of a new shared space can be an essential quest for empathy formation among people.

Page

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1: HYBRID SPACE Moving Space Space in Between Living Body Space Lost Space

CHAPTER 2: RELATIONAL AESTHETICS Relational Aesthetics through Space Relation of Empathy Sensing Machine

CHAPTER 3: SHARING, AND COMMONS IN THE CITY Interdependence Sharing City Share Fairly Shared Politics

19 22 23 24

28 30 32

41 42 44 46 48

CHAPTER 4: PROSTHETICS ECOLOGIES Urban Foodshed Prosthetic Ecologies

CONCLUSION

53 53

INDEX

GLOSSARY Relational Aesthetics.

(Retrieved from https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/r/

relational-aesthetics) “A set of artistic practices which take as their theoretical and practical point of departure the whole of human relations and their social context, rather than an independent and private space”.

Urban Commons. (Retrieved from http://www.ccri.ac.uk/what-makes-a-commons-citiesand-the-concept-of-urban-commons) “The

goods, tangible, intangible and digital, that citizens and the Administration, also through participative and deliberative procedures, recognize to be functional to the individual and collective wellbeing, activating consequently towards them, to share the responsibility with the Administration”.

Hybrid Space.

(Retrieved from https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/online-learning-

“The Space which comprises both physical and virtual space. Constructed space that attempts to preserve more than one property (possibly in conflict) of the original space”.

community/13500)

Human Nature. (Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_nature) “Human nature is a bundle of fundamental characteristics - including ways of thinking, feeling, and acting - which humans tend to have naturally”.

Benevolence, Righteousness, Trustworthiness and Wisdom. (Retrieved from http://www.foreignercn.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5047:the -five-constant-virtues-of-china&catid=1:history-and-culture&Itemid=114) “The Five Constant Virtues which are the most important ones in traditional virtues of China. Although they all came from Confucianism.

Innately Good.

“Humans have a tendency to become good if raised in an environment that is healthy for them. (e.g., it is normal for humans to show compassion for the suffering of others) as well as empirical claims)”. (Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mencius)

Interdependence. (Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdependence) “Interdependence is the mutual reliance between two or more groups”.

Commoning.

(Retrieved from http://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Commoning)

Torre David.

(Retrieved from http://u-tt.com/project/torre-david)

“The social practices used by commoners in the course of managing shared resources and reclaiming the commons”.

“Torre David, a 45-story office tower in Caracas, was almost complete when it was abandoned following the death of its developer and a national banking crisis that crippled the Venezuelan economy in 1994. Neglected for over a decade, in 2007 it became the improvised home for a community of over 1,000 families living in an extra-legal and tenuous occupation that many called a vertical slum”.

Park[ing] Day. (Retrieved from http://beautifultrouble.org/case/parking-day) “This concept - a park in a parking spot - was a working at the intersections of art and activism. A movement to challenge and repurpose space by temporarily transforming metered parking spaces into public parks”. Foodshed. (Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foodshed) “Foodshed is the geographic region that produces the food for a particular population. The term is used to describe a region of food flows, from the area where it is produced, to the place where it is consumed

Watershed. (Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/watershed)

“An area or ridge of land that separates waters flowing to different rivers, basins, or seas”.

KEYWORDS Relational Aesthetics

Hybrid Space

Empathy

Urban Commons

INTRODUTION

The purpose of this study is to describe the design project ‘Prosthetic Ecologies’ and its theoretical background. The essay elaborates on the project and its application of empathy and the urban commons to the context that daily life in a city is ‘the space that creates the relationship’. Because urban daily life is familiar, people are hardly aware of their lives in it. This study aims to find out the reason for this familiarity with urban spaces and the empathy expressed in relation with people. In particular, this essay will explore the various relationships that arise in everyday life from the point of view of relational aesthetics, and examine the multi-layered meaning and aesthetic significance of spatial experience.

Human beings are aware of space through their experiences of familiar spaces around them, and they have a sense of space through their awareness of the ‘outside’ in an unfamiliar environment. The space also develops relatively and relationally in a myriad of relationships, including people and things. Cristian Norberg-Schultz, the architect and theorist, stated the place as the space where life takes place from a phenomenological point of view (C.Norberg-Schulz 1980). The spaces and places that are closely connected with life are understood through various spatial experiences.

First, spatial experiences encompass the notions of urban space, space as a social product, and the concept of potential space expanding in the fixed entity of the urban environment. It was discovered that boundaries became meaningless by way of various spatial experiences. This explains the virtuality, fluidity, and movement of living organisms within hybrid spaces, like a house or a city, where people spend a lot of their time. A hybrid space is a ‘flexible space’ without any fixed entities. Therefore, this chapter aim to do is explain the potential space concept by taking a second look at space. The notion of ‘virtuality’ or ‘actual space’ proposed by Elizabeth Grosz takes a pivotal position in this essay (E.Grosz 2001). Second, If ‘hybrid space’ refers to a system of thought which contemplates space, ‘relational aesthetic space’ is a space in which the form of space, sensibility and ‘relational aesthetics’ emerge (N.Bourriaud 2002). The relationship aesthetics Nicholas Bourriaud speaks of is an aesthetic theory based on human interrelationships in the social context and has the characteristic of creating relations or situations through practical performance such as the participation of people in the arts. It looks at the realm of empathy in that relationship. In addition, this study suggests sensible machine design for spaces of ‘empathy’ after examining ‘empathy’ using Mencius’s emotional understanding method (W.Bryan 2002). Mencius is a typical oriental philosopher who has dealt with the continuous distress of empathy and emotion. Third, this essay will re-invent the ‘shared concept’ in a modern way and redefine urban common ground to promote human empathy and prosperity. Human beings need a new approach

to urban design that recognises human potential as a relational, sympathetic, and shared entity.

Finally, embodied in the design project of this study is the means to create a relationship with the city. The project â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Prosthetic Ecologiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is a new empathy-sharing area born from the relationship between human and nature. This space will be a chance to make people aware of how much space affects human life throughout the everyday.

CHAPTER 1 HYBRID SPACE

1.1 Moving Space

If people become familiar with a space and make that space the object of an organic relation, the space can be recognized as being fluid and possessing vitality. Therefore, the reason for the space can be extended from a physical space to a space of the imagination, and even into realms with an absence of physical reality like cyberspace. Elizabeth Grosz is a theoretician who advocated this argument. She introduces the ‘outside’ into the fixed reality of architecture and recognises space as a living body. She borrows the ways in which philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Henri Bergson (E.Grosz 2001) used to think about space, and reads the potential of space. A decentralized idea, such as the reason, gap, and the potentiality Deleuze perceives, leads to living, breathing and the body. She criticizes the existing framework for creating and embracing space and analyses the space of various meanings. She also shows a more dynamic understanding of space and architecture and how to think about architecture from the outside. Grosz analyses spatial concepts and architecture derived from the philosophical concepts of Deleuze and Bergson. She insists that “time is the potential of space, the potential is inherent in the real thing”.

She recognizes that space is a living reality and is transformed by practice. Thus, Grosz’s theory is based on the concept of the virtual, the actual, the possible, and the real, as described by Bergson, which Deleuze accepts. As Grosz exploits the concept of space and architecture, she implies that the various items that are ideologically confronted are “consciousness and body, inner and outer space, time and space”. Also, Grosz recognizes time as a potential concept as well as space. She notes that from a historical point of view, the present and the future have not yet come, but are in a potential state. So the important distinction in time is the past and the present, and these are fundamentally coexistent and synchronous. Therefore Bergson’s time idea is the theoretical background. He writes that “all the past remains a contracted form at every moment in the present.” and “The past is the potential to co-exist in the present, the past is in time.” Also, he says “If the past does not coexist with the present that has already become a past, the past will never exist.” The hybrid space was further intensified because of its complete openness, unpredictable in time. The movement of space and time, which has become a frequent subject in the genre of art, is often seen in popular culture in recent years. Time travel which is often used in movies and dramas, refers to the way in which past and present move beyond time and space. It adds an element of fantasy and imagination to the viewers by adding a sophisticated composition to existing methods that go beyond time and space. As time slides over time or over the surface of the world, time expands time and space for the future, past, and present times. Therefore, time and space can be perceived as

something not yet realised because it is fluid and moves in a completely open fashion.

Thus, ’moving space’ shows that terms which are changeable and ideologically opposed are also contiguous. A ‘moving space’ that affirms the potential nature of space is a concept that recognizes space as a fluid reality, not something that is fixed.

1.2 Space in Between The ‘space in between’ does not make or break dichotomous opposition but rather focuses on the gap. The gap also exists between objects and becomes a gap space. The idea is that the gap flows into the cracks of seeing and talking. The idea is to help create and change what is already in the subject and object, as a crack that seems to break apart one being from another. Therefore, through the process of organising special experiences, the ‘perception space’ becomes a potential space in which to discover oneself. Grosz discussed architecture starting from Deleuze’s virtuality, which notes that architecture leads to the building of openness not only with respect to the technical aspects of a building, but also to its potential technologies that might be deployed inside. The virtual and the possible that Bergson describes are, in other words, the possibility is reality and virtuality is infinite. The virtual, therefore, includes much more content and is inherent in the real, whilst thought has active and positive forces that make a difference in any form. Grosz refers to the fact that human beings live inside architecture, but architecture also exists in human beings, because the outside is not a stop or settlement but a series of changes and movements. Therefore, the inherent potential is the essence that supports expansion into wider spaces.

1.3 Living Body Space The body can be interpreted as a category of space, where the space itself can be seen as a living thing. In phenomenology, a house is analysed as an enlarged body. If humans can apply the concept of housing to the body, then the concept of the body can be applied to the house as well. Luce Irigaray (E.Grosz 2001) argues that women have functioned only as a container of the male identity and that femininity has been spatialized. However, Grosz opposes the perception that architecture is a kind of ‘container’. She notes that architecture must be “a living entity where various bodies live and are twisted and transformed by practice,” and should be assessed based on potentials that go beyond the possibilities granted by something. Thus, Grosz argues that the attributes of space, passivity, neutrality, fluidity, emptiness, fullness, are precisely identical to feminine and maternal attributes. However, she explains that the way of dealing with femininity is not the resemblance but the way in which the space is conceptualized. Therefore, both real space and imaginary space can be called space. In the end, space is not fixed, but a fluid and living body.

The inherent potential space creates a ‘third hybrid space’. Humans have experienced and witnessed the unpredictable space that coexists with people in a moving, living space. Therefore, space can be endlessly divided into two bifurcations, where unconstrained diversity is integrated. Ultimately, the many spaces we experience and perceive form a myriad of relationships between things and things, people and people, things and people.

1.4 Lost Space At present, mobile media has created a hybrid space, through the creation of making its own private space in cyberspace, or the enabling of private spaces underground or on the street. The shortening of the physical time and distance caused by the capital market thus ironically reinforces de-spatialization and non-placeness. An example of this overturning of space is the pavilion project at ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich). The pavilion was designed as if floating in a narrow gap between buildings on New York’s 1st Street Garden, giving rise to vividness as well as visualization. This material, which is produced and used for indoor panels to replace gypsum board with dry wall structure, has been utilized as exterior material of the pavilion. The triangle block made by assembling 2000 sheets makes the height increase, the weight of the structure is reduced, and prefabrication is possible. In the structure, ETH Zurich designed a program called ‘Building from waste’, which enlivened the urban space in a way that had never been seen before. Due to the construction of facilities enabling the recycling of urban resources, people were gathered and redefined as spaces for new relationship formation. Therefore, the place where a sense of place was lost was reborn as a meaningful space. In this process, people pay attention to the expansion and change of space created by the formation of relations. It can be recognized that even a small space can be transformed into a space that becomes a new meaning according to the formation of relations.

(fig. 02) The Pavilion Project at ETH Zurich

(fig. 01) The Pavilion Project at ETH Zurich

CHAPTER 2 RELATIONAL AESTHETICS

The uniformity of modern urban spaces makes it difficult to have a sense of depth or to recognize the place meaningfully. In today’s fast-paced society, human beings find it difficult to recognize and perceive their surroundings. Michel Foucault did not view space as a matter of structure or form, but instead as living in a set of relations (M. Palladino 2015) . In other words, he argues that space is neither a matter of placing objects nor a problem of a walled spatial form. This means that it is not a question of space but a problem with people’s actions or behaviours, the sequencing of heterogeneous and diverse elements connected with this, and the problem of ‘repetition of sequencing’. From this point of view, this study pays attention to various factors that characterize space without recognizing it as a structure. Eventually, space can be read in various contexts depending on the factors involved.

2.1 Relational Aesthetics through Space It is true that spatial and temporal distances have been reduced due to the development of computer networks and means of transportation such as air travel. Modern people movedue to migration, travel, work, and study. In the present age, human beings break down diverse boundaries and voluntarily become modern nomads and travellers. They deeply intervene in others’ lives and experience the world from the eyes of others. This phenomenon gives artists, designers and architects flexibility in their reasoning and a social acceptance of their work. It also opens up the formation and horizontal expansion of relationships as if they had opened a door and were able to experience the life of another. In this sense, relational aesthetics is an artistic practice in this sense. Relational aesthetics is “an aesthetic theory that experiences and judges works according to interrelated human relations that the work shapes, produces, or causes in the space”. Nicholas Bourriaud argues that “the ways in which relationships are created themselves are the epitome of aesthetic objects that can be explored as such today.” The infinite relationship between one space and another causes the space of a person’s life to be perceived as a relationship space. The present age in particular recognizes and expands space differently according to the mobility of life. In this respect, countless forms of relationship aesthetics can be created. The space of life is endlessly differentiated and summed up by the spatial form, structure, and the various relationships formed in everyday life. Even in a standardized urban residential space, individual space tastes are different.

It is also important to acknowledge differences beyond discovering and understanding othersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; tastes. The most important thing to notice is the relationship between the content and the process that it manifests.

2.2 Relation of Empathy Empathy is the communication of emotion. Emotions are common to all, universal yet also individual as people each have their own feelings, unique and distinct from the feelings of other people. In order to understand the empathy that emotions and feelings communicate, it is necessary to analyse the basis of empathy. Mencius suggested a ‘good nature principle’ as a foundation for emotions (W. Bryan 2002). It is through ‘emotion’ that the goodness of human nature is revealed. For him, emotion is an immediate reaction in the mind. In other words, a human expressing what they feel before they think or logically judge, that would be an emotional reaction. For Mencius, emotions are a clue to a person’s good nature. Therefore, he can see the benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom of human nature through a person’s feelings. It is important to use the good nature principle as the foundation of sympathy, because emotion is something everyone has, even though it is unique to each individual. If there is no common ground between the unique feelings of two or more individuals, they may become confused. In this sense, the good nature principle proposed by Mencius plays an important role as the foundation of emotion. Some actions are accompanied by greed, but there is room for empathy and understanding if the person undertaking these actions is good. If Mencius defines empathy as the key element of a living, affectionate city, people will first ask how they can bring empathy into the city. He argues that empathy should be created through use of the correct knowledge, not searched for. Correct knowledge means looking at people and cities

with an understanding that emotions are based on humanityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s good nature and that their emotions are inevitably good.

2.3 Sensing Machine The abstraction of the human circulatory system into a machine that visualises the pulse of a human heart rate in a dynamic way suggests a profound approach towards understanding all our involuntarily shared biological data. The constantly changing and adapting nature of this data places the individual in a very crucial position within the wider ecology. The fundamental elements of the machine include air, and pigmented water, which are influenced in their rhythm based on the heart rate sensor that gathers data from the individual interacting with the machine. The gaps of air and water are uniquely different along the entirety of the system thus allowing the visualisation of a time frame of the individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interaction with the machine. The crucial aspect of this machine rests on the ability to read the visualized data and link it with a spatial element that is hardwired to the data being sensed from the human. Designing an open system suggests data being transformed into usable information that self regulates and optimizes itself, creating a feedback loop mechanism. Going back to the human circulatory system, where the flow of blood within the body serves a specific and fundamental duty of transporting blood to the various parts of the body, to be contrasted with this machine which is a closed system and its current output is establishing a visual relationship between the human and the machine. What makes this machine fascinating is its ability to reflect an aspect of the human body that is never seen.

(fig. 03) Sensing Machine

(fig. 04) Sensing Machine

(fig. 05) Sensing Machine

[110] [105]

90 BPM

[86]

[86] [82]

[72]

[69] [64] [62]

[62]

60 BPM

1.0_ Unit

0 0

2.0_ Heart rate

[52]

0 0

1 0

0 0 0

1 1

0 0

0 0 0

0 0

3.0_ Transforming Heart rate data in a Binary Code System

1 1

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 1

1 0

0 0

1 1 0

0 0

1 1

1 0

1 1

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 1 Seconds

Layers

1’00

4.0_ Heart rate data over Time

2’00

3’00

4’00

5’00

6’00

(fig. 06) Sensing Machine

7’00

8’00

9’00

10’00

Water [Solid]

Air [Void]

Water [Solid]

Air [Void]

Water [Solid]

Air [Void]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

Air [Void]

[0]

[1]

[0]

[1]

Water [Solid]

[1]

[0]

Direction

Rotate Speed [56 rpm]

Reverse Direction

Rotate Speed [85 rpm]

Direction

Air + Water [In]

Continuous flow direction

Speed Average [60 rpm]

Increasing speed flow

Reverse direction flow 1

CHAPTER 3 SHARING, AND COMMONS IN THE CITY

Cities have always shared space, and the common land in the city has been built and sustained by its citizens (D.Harvey 2012). Certain clusters in modern cities share the same cultural and ethnic origins. Cities are also a place where the rich and the poor live, quite often in close proximity, work, and survive and where the difference between them is most obvious. Therefore, in order for humanity to live and prosper in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s international cities, it is necessary to modernize the sharing concept again and reconstruct an inclusive urban commons.

This chapter argues that modern, intermediated sharing provides such a possibility. But to realize such a possibility, the first step is to not treat human beings as autonomous and selfish individuals, as is assumed in neoliberal economic theory and commercial practice. As a relational, connected and shared existence, a new approach to the cooperative governance, design and construction of cities and infrastructure is needed.

3.1 Interdependence In modern cities, humans are more dependent on each other than ever before. However, major politicians around the world are catering to the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;perversion populismâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of emphasizing personal choices and refusing to admit the existence of real differences. Their populism praises individual autonomy, but at the same time, it tries to build a barrier for the rich cultural and political elites, and does not equal afford opportunity. These contemporary political cultures are reaching their limit in terms of the global resilience of the world and human rights groups are voicing opposition to human interdependent reality (A.Picon 2015). Sharing is mankindâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s evolved response to its interdependent nature. Humans have evolved, both biologically and culturally, as collaborators and sharers (M.Pagel 2012). Even today, under the right conditions, they still choose to share. Humans rely on reciprocity in their lives, for their happiness and their ability to prosper and form relationships. Humans share a wide variety of things in surprisingly diverse ways. Sharing in all its forms is a product of human nature, one that has evolved us into social animals. This nature is cultural as much as it is biological. The nature to share is deeply rooted in the ability of people to cooperate in troupes, to trust others in their social groupings, and to respond to each other. What this emphasizes is the sociocultural tradition that is still in existence today (C.Ratti 2014). The city has triggered political degeneration and the formation of barriers, and the collapse of community and trust is also manifested in growing disorder, violence and separatist

discrimination in city environments (R.Sennett 2012). But without sharing, a city cannot function. Modern cities are increasingly facing a dilemma. This is because traditional sharing is confined to the community of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;people like usâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; who reject the other, and defeatist isolation that pursues personal autonomy as the process of decay consumes neoliberal capitalism. This form of capitalism is not able to revive the urban commons in crisis. However, it is interesting to note that a new peerto-peer (P2P) sharing scheme and an intermediated sharing scheme are emerging at the intersection of a highly complex physical space entangled with cyberspace (C.Ratti 2016). The inter-mediated sharing forms support the international potential of the market, but also revive the collective cohesion of traditional sharing.

3.2 Sharing City The emotions enabled by emerging ‘sharing cities’ are one of the most promising signs of modern times. This is because the city aims to redirect and rediscover humanity, not to improve environmental efficiency or stimulate a vibrant economy. Sharing cities focus on the city’s shared resources, enabling citizens to join forces as parties to share and cooperate in their interests, rights, ownerships and productive capacities rather than competing as autonomous and separate individuals. For example, ‘The Cheonggye-stream’ symbolizes Seoul’s approach to sharing with modern Seoul. In 2005, Seoul succeeded in reducing road traffic and pollution by replacing a road with a new shared space opened to the public by closing one major overpass and restoring ‘The Cheonggyestream’. In addition, Seoul is actively working to build public trust for shared companies and shared organizations, and to foster an inclusive and shared culture at the general public and the individual citizen level. The purpose of this initiative is to expand physical and digital shared infrastructure, support shared economic start-ups, and better utilize idle public resources. To further enhance the social inclusion of these sharing initiatives, Seoul provides free smartphones for seniors and people with disabilities to allow them access to the same services, applications, and shared resources as everyone else. Cities such as Seoul are newly recognizing the value of basic urban communities created by the mutual cooperation of citizens and public organizations under the framework of a new digital commons, which includes commercial shared platforms, intermediary agencies, citizen participation, municipalities, and charitable Web sites.

(fig. 08) The Cheonggye-stream in 2017

(fig. 07) The Cheonggye-stream in 1985

3.3 Share Fairly The value of sharing has the potential to promote equality and inclusion. In order for ‘shared cities’ to support the value of justice, a ‘shared paradigm’ that goes beyond the shared economy is essential. This means that people go beyond what they buy with money and instead sympathise with each other, to form interdependent relationships. Such relationships are recognized and reinforced through the practice of sharing (C. Tonkinwise 2014). Therefore, it is possible to steadily increase or decrease acts of sharing through daily experience and practice, social wisdom and behaviour, policy, and marketing. Neoliberalism, a currently dominant ideology, threatens sharing by encouraging frivolous individualism. Instead, a shared paradigm sees humans as social entities that rely on one another, not as autonomous individuals, but as beings who form and engage in non-transactional relationships. This paradigm brings about changes in behaviour, in commonly perceived myths, and in people’s identities. And in a society that is already dominated by commercial shared platforms (Uber, Airbnb, and TaskRabbit), this form of sharing helps revitalize the value of trust and community in an inclusive or ‘world citizen’ way. In order for sharing to be fair, public authorities such as cities must present guidelines and regulations that all parties can agree upon and abide by.

Creating is about sharing ideas, sharing aesthetics, sharing what you believe in with other people.

- Shepard Fairey

3.4 Shared Politics Commercial sharing can also help with value transformation, as sharing gives the strongest power when it comes to reaching out to those who have no voice and no power, and thus are excluded, at least in part, from aspects of society. Commercial sharing is often not egalitarian. This is because it is more focused on enriching the lives of the elite and allows the rich to make money for their homes, cars and yachts rather than providing assets to the underprivileged. Therefore, shared cities should promote policies, regulations and norms that favour a collective common ground rather than commercial sharing. Anti-cultural activities in the commons such as graffiti and unauthorized possession take place all over the world and occur in spaces where the power of government does not exist. In the end, this space is where a broader approach to social change can be created. This autonomous space also refers to the lost space mentioned in Chapter 1. Sharing redefines consumption in an upward, counter-cultural, and intercultural way, redefining our identity in a manner that is cooperative and co-productive in terms of services and products that meet basic demands. This sharing enables an emergent supply of bottom-up rather than a top-down. Urban planning, design and infrastructure can have a new expectations. It is not merely asking the opinions of citizens at the planning stage, but involves the citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s involvement in the process and promoting a way of building the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;houseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; on their own and co-producing the shared infrastructure. This is a possible scenario, and not

just in developing countries. Architects and planners can find inspiration in informal, temporary, and experimental development methods and apply them to developed nations (J.McGuirk 2015). They can see a variety of ways to take possession of the ‘Torre David’ building in Caracas, Venezuela’s capital, as well as to change ‘Parking Lot’ to garden on ‘Park [ing] Day’. In this shared paradigm, it is important to encourage experimentation but to ensure cooperative governance, which commercial sharing allows cities to impose and adjust the limits to maximize profits.

(fig. 09) Torre David Exterior

(fig. 11) Park[ing] Day

(fig. 10) Torre David Interior

(fig. 12) Prosthetic Ecologies

CHAPTER 4 PROSTHETICS ECOLOGIES

4.1 Urban Foodshed

Since the beginning of the 21st century, humans have witnessed a series of food security disasters. From the ongoing collapse of honeybee colonies beginning in 2006 to failures of wheat production in Eastern Europe beginning in 2012, and most recently to the outbreak of bird flu in Europe and Asia in 2016, humans have entered an era of food shortages: peak corn in 1985, peak rice and fish in 1988, peak wheat in 2004, and peak chicken in 2006 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/world-hitpeak-chicken-2006-180954037). From the peak oil concept, peak food, which is a time when the greatest level of production is followed by stagnation or permanent decline, is going to happen more quickly than anticipated or something else etc (70 percent of the world’s water consumption in relation to the declining production of these main food crops). In addition, as peak food leads to generalized food insecurity, food markets become more volatile and food shortages begin to impact the poorest populations. At the same time, humans have also witnessed the rise of ‘new water barons’ who are the world’s largest multinational investment bank and riches (J.Yang 2012) are competing for land near major water sources around the world (https://www.iatp.org/blog/201301/the-global-water-grab).

4.2 Prosthetic Ecologies The notion of a ‘food city’ is based on the ‘foodshed’ concept, a vision of an alternative urban food system based on the sustainable use of land, water and energy. A ‘foodshed’ constitutes the geographic area and the associated resource flow that produces food for a specific population. The term comes from food ecologist and urban geographer who modified the term ‘watershed’ to match the socio-economic context of food production, thereby restoring the meaning of the place to the human food system, as well as “promoting critical thinking about where their food comes from and how to reach them” (Jack Kloppenburg Jr., John Hendrickson, and G. W. Stevenson 1996). The design project ‘Prosthetic Ecologies’ will awaken and change awareness of the terrain of food production, distribution and consumption in the daily life of the city. Underground farms, which operate a pivotal role in the food ecosystem of ‘Prosthetic Ecologies’, will provide essential food for people’s needs. In urban farming, users can cultivate the crops they want, such as lettuce, kidney beans, tomatoes and peppers. The main source of water for this fresh crop will be rainwater collected in groundwater and stormwater reservoirs. And cultivated crops are shared, traded and consumed by and among users. Healthy sharing creates empathy and builds more open and inclusive ‘shared’ communities. In addition, as farming space for the public good and urban common areas grows, healthier sharing can take place, which in turn helps to renew the conditions and coordinating factors of collective and democratic action for the common good. Sharing the whole city through this project can be aimed at attracting

future cities. In addition, users are able to create the network of empathic areas that the social hierarchy disappears in this space based on each otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests.

(fig. 13) Prosthetic Ecologies

(fig. 14) Prosthetic Ecologies

(fig. 15) Prosthetic Ecologies

CONCLUSION The purpose of this essay was to re-understand the formation of the relationship between humans and the cities we inhabit, through spatial studies. Therefore, it is meaningful that this study reinterprets the relationship between the surrounding space and everyday life aesthetically, and focuses on the empathy, the new gaze and the relationship formation of the shared city. When this study looked at various aspects of space, there was a concept of hybrid space that expands the reason for space or spatial experiences mentioned in human geography. The essence of this essay was that the space itself could be viewed as a potential space with its own vitality. In other words, as space changes become more numerous, that space becomes a living body.

Also, the sensibility and experience of space can be recognised by integrating that space into the relationship of empathy, because the sense of space that is not directly exposed and the experience of that space reveal different aspects of a spaceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s character. Therefore, it was possible to see that a myriad of relationships and a consensus can be formed in a space. As a result, this essay has identified the process by which meaningless space becomes meaningful through empathy, an opportunity to become aware of how much shared space in everyday life affects human life. Awareness of empathy made them actively involved in their relationship with others. This practical way can be developed into the aesthetics of relationship that people share and experience in their everyday life, and who agree in heir social context. As a result, this study argues that the potential of space and the various relationships that take place within it have produced sufficient momentum to awaken the modern world to the life of voluntary, nomadic people.

BIBLIOGRAPHY References. Bryan, W. (2002) “The Emotion of Shame and the Virtue of Righteousness in Mencius” Bourriaud, N. (2002) “Relational Aesthetics”, Les Press. Bland, A. (2015) “The World Hit “Peak Chicken” in 2006” https:// w w w. s m i t h s o n i a n m a g . c o m / s c i e n c e - n a t u r e / w o r l d - h i t - p e a k chicken-2006-180954037 (Last accessed: 12 July 2018) Grosz, E. (2001) “Architecture from the Outside: Essays on Virtual and Real Space”, MIT Press. Harvey, D. (2012) “Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution”, Verso. Jack Kloppenburg Jr., John Hendrickson, and G. W. Stevenson (1996) “Coming in to the Foodshed”, Agriculture and Human Values. McGuirk, J. (2015) “Radical Cities: Across Latin America in Search of a New Architecture”, Verso. Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980) “Genius loci: towards a phenomenology of architecture”, Rizzoli, pp 5. Palladino, M. (2015) “The Globalization of Space: Foucault and Heterotopia”, Routledge, pp 81.

Pagel, M. (2012) “Wired for Culture: The Natural History of Human Cooperation”, Penguin. Picon, A. (2015) “Smart Cities: A Spatialised Intelligence”, Wiley. Ratti, C. (2014) “Decoding the City: Urbanism in the Age of Big Data”, Birkhauser. Ratti, C., Claudei, M. (2016) “The City of Tomorrow: Sensors, Networks, Hackers, and the Future of urban Life”, Yale University Press. Sennett, R. (2012) “Together: The Rituals, Pleasures, and Politics of Cooperation”, Yale University Press. Tonkinwise, C. (2014) “Sharing you can believe in” https://medium. com/@camerontw/sharing-you-can-believe-in-9b68718c4b33 (Last accessed 5 July 2018) Varghese, S. (2013) “The Global Water Grab” https://www.iatp.org/ blog/201301/the-global-water-grab (Last accessed 5 July 2018) Yang, J. (2012) The New “Water Barons”: Wall Street Mega-Banks

and the Tycoons Are Buying up Water at Unprecedented Pace http:// www.marketoracle.co.uk/article38167.html (Last accessed 5 July 2018)

Image Sources. Figure 01, 02. https://www.dezeen.com/2015/06/01/eth-zurich-arche d-pavilion-upcycled-beverage-cartons-new-york-ideas-city-recycledsustainable-design/ Figure 03. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 04. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 05. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 06. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 07. http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2015/09/08/201 5090800979.html Figure 08. https://seoulistic.com/attraction/nature-parks-outdoor/che onggyecheon-stream/ Figure 09, 10. https://ragpickinghistory.co.uk/2017/04/24/pirate-utopi a-torre-david/ Figure 11. https://100architects.com/endorsed/parkingday/ Figure 12. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 13. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 14. Author’s own. 2018. Design project Figure 15. Author’s own. 2018. Design project