Contextualising Urban Experimentation: Analysing the Utopiastadt Campus Case with the Theory of Strategic Action Fields

Abstract

Practices of urban experimentation are currently seen as a promising approach to making planning processes more collaborative and adaptive. The practices develop not only in the context of ideal-type concepts of urban experiments and urban labs but also organically in specific governance contexts. We present such an organic case in the city of Wuppertal, Germany, centred around a so-called change-maker initiative, ‘Utopiastadt.’ This initiative joined forces with the city administration and collaborated with a private property owner and the local economic development agency in an unusual planning process for the development of a central brownfield site. Ultimately, the consortium jointly published a framework concept that picked up the vision of the ‘Utopiastadt Campus’ as an open-ended catalyst area for pilot projects and experiments on sustainability and city development. The concept was adopted by the city council and Utopiastadt purchased more than 50% of the land. In order to analyse the wider governance context and power struggles, we apply the social-constructivist theory of Strategic Action Fields (SAFs). We focused on the phases of contention and settlement, the shift in interaction forms, the role of an area development board as an internal governance unit and the influences of proximate fields, strategic action, and state facilitation on the development. We aim to demonstrate the potential of the theory of SAFs to understand a long-term urban development process and how an episode of experimentation evolved within this process. We discuss the theory’s shortcomings and reflect critically on whether the process contributed to strengthening collaborative and experimental approaches in the governance of city development.

Navigating context in experiments: The “real,” the roots, the rationale

“…Put differently, if non-technological experiments are closely linked to the place of their implementation, how can they leapfrog incremental change processes in rigid structural contexts, if at the same time they cannot “escape” these contexts? The relevance of context for properly explaining how and why transformative endeavors fail or succeed in specific places has already been highlighted before (Van den Heiligenberg et al, 2017; Wanner et al, 2021). We argue that knowledge and reflexivity of these contextual variables are critical for non-technological experiments, as they constitute both the problem background and the framework for action of experimental initiatives.…”

“…It is intended to stimulate novel solutions to sustainability problems in specific socio-technical systems such as energy and mobility. If deemed successful, the resulting products or services are meant to diffuse to other locations and to be scaled to initiate socio-technical regime change (Sengers et al, 2019;Wanner et al, 2021). 2.…”

“…Experimentation is often viewed as an expression of an increasingly challenge-driven political culture that aims to tackle grand societal challenges while being aware of their complexity and intertwined character that do not allow for universal solutions with predefined outcomes and impacts (Raven et al, 2019). Instead, they call for an iterative, non-linear trial-and-error attitude, where collaborative ideation, prototyping, and testing are key (Fünfschilling et al, 2019; Wanner et al, 2021), and the acceptance of failure and learning-by-failing are significant scenarios (Fünfschilling et al, 2019; Wanner et al, 2021). Hence, experiments are also referred to as a way of “reflection in action” (Torrens and Von Wirth, 2021).…”

Towards Liveability in Historic Centres: Challenges and Enablers of Transformation in Two Latvian Towns

“…One possibility involves experimentation and interventions in the urban environment (Eneqvist & Karvonen, 2021). In recent years, they have increasingly been seen as a working tool of the local government or as a way to achieve more dynamic changes in the urban environment (Evans et al, 2021;Healey, 2010;Munthe-Kaas, 2015;Scholl & de Kraker, 2021;Sehested, 2009;Wanner et al, 2021), which responds to the demand of the population. The intervention approach means that activities are directed by the municipality along with the creation of new types of interactions with civil society and its activities.…”

Transformative und agile Innovationssysteme

“…Die Governance von Innovationssystemen kann in diesem Sinne auch als eine Form der »Koproduktion« verstanden werden. Der Begriff findet aktuell vor allem in Kontexten urbaner Transformation und nachhaltiger Stadtentwicklung Verwendung und beschreibt sich verändernde Governance-Prozesse mit neuen Rollen für Politik und Verwaltung im Zusammenspiel mit weiteren lokalen Akteuren, insbesondere auch der Zivilgesellschaft oder der Wissenschaft (Wanner et al 2021(Wanner et al , 2022. Anschlussfähig ist der Begriff ebenfalls an die Transformationsforschung und die hier avisierte Koproduktion von Orientierungs-und Transformationswissen, welches disziplinäre Wissensbestände und Praxiswissen integriert und so zu innovativen Lösungen für gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen kommt.…”