Urbanistica Peer-to-Peer (P2P Urbanism)

Definizione redatta dal gruppo di lavoro “Urbanistica Peer to Peer”: Antonio Caperna, Michael Mehaffy, Geeta Mehta, Federico Mena-Quintero, Agatino Rizzo, Nikos A. Salingaros, Stefano Serafini, Emanuele Strano.

Traduzione in italiano di Alessia Cerqua

P2P Urbanism - wikipedia

P2P Urbanism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P2P_Urbanism

Federico Mena Quintero on P2P Urbanism

Interview with Federico Mena Quintero on P2P Urbanism

Interview with Federico Mena Quintero on P2P Urbanism from arch4people on Vimeo.

Interview with Stefano Serafini on P2P Urbanism

Interview with Stefano Serafini on P2P Urbanism from arch4people on Vimeo.

Brief History of P2P-Urbanism

A BRIEF HISTORY OF P2P-URBANISM.
By Nikos A. Salingaros & Federico Mena-Quintero. (Version 4.0, October 2010)

P2P (peer-to-peer) Urbanism joins ideas from the open-source software movement together with new thinking by urbanists, into a discipline oriented towards satisfying human needs. P2P-Urbanism is concerned with cooperative and creative efforts to define space for people’s use. This essay explains P2P-Urbanism as the outcome of several historical processes, describes the cooperative participation schemes that P2P-Urbanism creates, and indicates the possible outcomes of applying P2P-Urbanism in different human environments.

P2P (peer-to-peer) urbanism.

Definition prepared by the “Peer-to-peer Urbanism Task Force” consisting of Antonio Caperna, Michael Mehaffy, Geeta Mehta, Federico Mena-Quintero, Agatino Rizzo, Nikos A. Salingaros, Stefano Serafini, and Emanuele Strano.

Michel Bauwens interviews Nikos Salingaros

MB. The peer-to-peer relational dynamic represents the basic human freedom for humans to connect to each other and to engage in actions without permissions. It can flourish in global cyber-collectives, but also on a local scale, particularly in the interstices of the mainstream system, in places where control is the weakest. Because of this paradoxical effect, it is possible to consider slum dynamics as a peer-to-peer system, which is the point of view of new urbanists like Michael Mehaffy, Nikos Salingaros, and Prakash M. Apte. They are defending the collective intelligence and value creation that have been constructed organically by slum dwellers. Another aspect is worth mentioning.

...about P2P Urbanism

P2P Urbanism may be understood as that collection of urban interventions carried out cooperatively by, amongst others, inhabitants, professionals, NGOs, public agencies, researchers, activists, artists, sociologists, and urban scientists meant to study, construct, and repair the city in a way that anyone may choose, participate, share, and modify theories, methods, and implementation technologies at any one time.

more on:  http://www.biourbanism.org/p2purbanism.htm

Three ways of exclusion, three ways of autonomy

Michel Bauwens

 

We just recently discovered the work of the Croation Pulska Grupa, organizers of the post-capitalist city conference in 2009. Their take on the local situation widely transcends these limitations, as in the following text, which counterposes urban alienation and self-building autonomy. “Such political decisions created a precarious situation in which the population of the coastal region is now facing enormous increases in real-estate prices, a lack of affordable housing, and job deficits outside the tourist season. Moreover, the people on the coast are also under permanent threat of losing their property if the urbanist plan–on which they have no influence–happens to include their land in a future golf terrain. Such insecurity is the direct result of a state repression that is based on three forms of exclusion:

Nikos Salingaros on Peer to Peer Urbanism

Interview with Michel Bauwens.

Q1: We've been covering some of your work on a new 'peer to peer' urbanism in our blog. Perhaps we can explore this connection further. First of all, do you agree with that assessment of your approach being in line with the peer to peer ethos. Tell us a little bit about yourself and how you came to your current thinking and practice. Finally, could you also what you think of my characterization of your work as neotraditional. What I mean is that premodern and what I would call 'trans'modern thinking are both concerned with the primacy of value and the immaterial, and that freed from the modernist rejection of all things traditional, we can now have an open mind and freely draw from thousands of years of human experience.