How can innovations foster collaboration and participation in the development of sustainable neighbourhoods? Insights from Lyon Living Lab.

(1)

IN

DEGREE PROJECT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS

STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2017,

How can innovations foster

collaboration and participation in the development of sustainable neighbourhoods?

Insights from Lyon Living Lab.

MARIE BOURCET

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

(2)

(3)

1 Bourcet Marie

bourcet@kth.se

How can innovations foster collaboration and participation in the development of sustainable neighbourhoods? Insights from Lyon

Living Lab.

Degree Project in Urban and Regional Planning

Stockholm 2017

KTH, Royal Institute of Technology Department of Urban and Regional Planning

Supervisor: Mats Lundström,

(4)

2

(5)

3

ABSTRACT

While sustainability issues take an ever-larger part in city planning, citizens aspirations to inclusion in projects rise. In France, the government encourages the development of collaboration between actors and the emergence of innovations in the creation of sustainable neighbourhoods. These incentives allow for the development of projects that aim at being demonstrators of French know how. Through these large-scale projects, partnerships are created, thus leading to more inclusive projects and to the creation of synergies between actors of the creation of urban fabric.

Through an in-depth study of one of these projects, this research aimed at assessing the outcomes of the top down approach implemented by the government. The idea was to study the government that was implemented and its outcomes in terms of creation of innovation but also regarding citizen participation. To identify citizens’ aspirations for inclusion and for the creation of fitted housing solutions, in coherence with sustainability issues, some research about a successful participatory housing project was conducted.

Through the implementation of a fitted governance system, collaboration between actors from different backgrounds and with varying interests lead to the creation of a creative process of innovation and to the development of many pilot projects. Through the analysis of these projects, it appeared that information and communication technologies are one tool to the implementation of a more efficient, of a more resilient city. However, they cannot be presented as one goal and need to take part of a bigger process with other tools that are necessary for the creation of new uses for urban dwellers.

Though citizen inclusion is an aspiration from various actors of the production of the city, some limits to citizen power in a really framed process of project development were raised. Despite a strong will, from various actors, there are still many obstacles to the creation of fitted housing solutions that would meet the deepest expectations of citizens.

Keywords:

Participation – Collaboration – Innovation – Co-design process – Citizen involvement – Sustainable neighbourhoods

(8)

6

SAMMANFATTNING

Medan hållbarhetsfrågor tar en allt större del i stadsplaneringen, medborgarnas ambitioner att ingå i projekt ökar. I Frankrike, regeringen uppmuntrar utvecklingen av samverkan mellan aktörer och uppkomsten av innovationer för att skapa hållbara stadsdelar. Dessa incitament möjliggöra en utveckling av projekt som syftar till att vara demonstranter i franska vet hur. Genom dessa storskaliga projekt, är partnerskap skapas, vilket leder till mer inkluderande projekt och till att skapa synergier mellan aktörer i skapandet av stadsstrukturen.

Genom en fördjupad studie av ett av dessa projekt, denna forskning som syftar till att utvärdera resultaten av top-down strategi genomförs av regeringen. Tanken var att studera regeringen som genomfördes och dess resultat när det gäller att skapa innovation, men om också medborgarnas deltagande. Att identifiera medborgarnas strävan efter integration och för skapandet av inbyggda boendelösningar, i överensstämmelse med hållbarhetsfrågor, var en del forskning om en framgångsrik bostads deltagande projekt genomförts.

Genom att genomföra en monterad styrningssystem, samverkan mellan aktörer från olika bakgrunder och med olika intressen leda till skapandet av en kreativ process av innovation och utveckling av många pilotprojekt. Genom analys av dessa projekt, visade det sig att informations- och kommunikationstekniken är ett verktyg för att genomföra en mer effektiv, av en mer motståndskraftig stad. Däremot kan de inte presenteras som ett mål och behöver ta del av en större process med andra verktyg som behövs för att skapa nya användningsområden för stadsbor.

Även medborgare integration är en strävan från olika aktörer i produktionen av staden, har vissa gränser för medborgare makt i en riktigt inramade process av projektutveckling upp.

Trots en stark vilja från olika aktörer, finns det fortfarande många hinder för skapandet av inbyggda boendelösningar som skulle uppfylla de djupaste medborgarnas förväntningar.

(9)

7

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Venn diagram illustrating the three pillars of sustainability ... 13

Figure 2: « Eight Rungs on a Ladder of Citizen participation » (Arnstein, 1969 :217) ... 20

Figure 3: Authentic Dialogue as framed by Innes & Booher (2003) ... 23

Figure 4: Localization of the project (Source of maps: Google maps) ... 29

Figure 5: Map of the South of the Peninsula, showing the phases of development (Source of the map: le-cartographe.net) ... 31

Figure 6: Localization of the project developed by Bouygues (Bouygues Immobilier, 2017) ... 33

Figure 7: Presentation of all the partners identified by Bouygues to work on the Lyon Living Lab project (Consortium, 2016) ... 36

Figure 8: Composition of the consortium controlling the project (Consortium,2016) ... 37

Figure 9: Picture taken by Bouygues Immobilier during the Kickoff event, showing some of the partners ... 38

Figure 10: Example of communication supports used during the Kickoff event (pictures taken by Bouygues Immobilier) ... 39

Figure 11: Principle of operation of the consortium (Consortium,2016) ... 40

Figure 12: Photographs of the Choux Lents project, taken on January 4th, 2017 by author ... 47

Figure 13: Charter setting the values of the Choux Lents group (Choux Lents group, 2012) ... 49

Figure 14: Localization of Lyon and main structural elements (Source of map: Google maps) ... 61

Figure 15: Superposition of the current land registry plan on the 1770 plan ... 63

Figure 16: Plan for the Perrache Peninsula, aqua colored in 1828, Source: Municipal Archives of the city of Lyon ... 64

(10)

8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would, first, like to thank my supervisor from KTH, Mats Lundström, who accompanied me for the development of this research project from the very beginning. Thank you very much for your insightful feedbacks which helped me to refine my objectives and allowed me to explore more specific research themes when I needed guidelines and focus.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my examiner from KTH, Maria Håkansson and to Xing Yin for their useful comments during my presentation. I would also like to thank all the persons responsible for the organization of thesis presentation in KTH for their work and availability.

I would also like to warmly thank Timothée Lefebvre du Preÿ, my supervisor at Bouygues Immobilier, for his availability and his advice during the drafting of this project. Thank you for always taking the time to share your knowledge and experience with me and for enabling me to progress in my understanding of the various issues at stake within the Lyon Living Lab project.

Thanks also to all the people I met during my internship for enabling me to participate and to immerse myself in the development of a large scale urban project. Thanks to everyone working in the office for

I would finally like to express my extreme gratitude to my family who always supported me during my years of study and encouraged me to follow my own path and never give up. Thanks to everyone who supported me during these years and especially this last semester.

(11)

9

1 Introduction

Sustainability issues and impacts of human activities on the environment are growing concerns among governments and citizens. At the same time, the desire from citizens to be included in sustainable development emerge. For example, a World Community Power Conference was organized in Japan in November 2016 and brought together academics, local politicians and members of the civil society (including schools) and of the corporate world to imagine how communities of citizens and agents of economic and political life could become agents of sustainable development on a local scale (Dreyfus, 2016).

1.1 Background

The tertiary residential sector represents 23.4% of the global carbon impact, right after transports. It is also responsible for 33% of the emissions of Atmospheric particulate matter (PM10), and the construction sub-sector due to construction sites is responsible for 10% of the emissions (Fontelle & al, 2003). City planning therefore is an important lever for action in the reduction of greenhouse gas and particulate matter emissions.

Collaboration between actors with different ambitions and stakes thus appears as a major issue to be addressed in the creation of sustainable neighborhoods.

This can be illustrated by the intensification of exhibitions and fairs that aim at enhancing cooperation of actors around sustainability issues. One example of that is the Pollutec Fair that took place in Lyon from the 29^th of November 2016 to the 2^nd of December. During this international event, actions were conducted to “facilitate the meeting of professionals around innovative solutions and new environmental themes” (Pollutec, 2016). The development of eco-responsible business solutions therefore appears to be important for those industrial groups.

1.2 Purpose of the study

Innovation is often presented as an almighty solution to the issues of sustainability among others. The use of the word “innovation” is omnipresent in the Medias and in literature for instance. This overrepresentation leads to concerns about the true meaning of that word and definitions are hard to find. When it comes to the development of sustainable cities, innovation is often related to the Numerical Revolution and to the development of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). In line with the integration of those technologies in the urban fabric, theories of Smart cities are being developed. In Europe for instance 75% of the population is urban and there are more connected devices than actual human beings in the cities (Moreno, 2016). Immediacy of communication between people changes the relationships between human beings and generates new economic models. These new models lead to changes in the relationship of urban dwellers to their city and to the way they experience their environment. ICTs are a way to make cities more efficient, more resilient and more desirable. However, technological changes are not the only pathway to make cities desirable. Diversification of uses and introduction of new services are also important for citizens to actually feel integrated in their habitat and to

(12)

10

relate to their environment. New models of production of city also start to emerge from the initiative of citizens who need to relate to their environment.

In France city planning is a quite processed field with a lot of different actors, with actions that tend to be compartmentalized. To put a new dynamic to the creation of sustainable cities and foster public private cooperation, the French government launched a call for interest (AMI) to industrials and local collectivities. This AMI aims at creating showcases of the French know-how in term of sustainable neighborhoods and foster the emergence of new economic models and innovations. The idea is to offer testing grounds for new models of urban design and management. Incentives are also given to the groups created to overcome regulatory and technical obstacles thus leading to the emergence of new topics: “digital and collaborative city, intensification of uses, new business models”

(DIVD, 2015). One program that was awarded with this AMI is a project of development of a Sustainable neighborhood in Lyon. The project, named Lyon Living Lab develops a twofold approach:

- At the scale of the metropolis, the creation of a neutral operator of multi-energy distribution and energy optimization data (project supported by General Electric and the group in charge of Energy with The municipality)

- At the scale of Confluence district a demonstrator for the establishment of a global operator of urban services will be created (project led by Bouygues and SPL Confluence).

This project, therefore aims at fostering collaboration between actors with various backgrounds, private and public, industrials and startups but also citizens, in the construction of the city.

1.3 Research questions

This paper aims at researching how top down approach to innovation can be integrated in the development of sustainable neighborhoods in France and how local initiatives emerge and can complement these top down approaches. The analysis will be based on the outcomes of the top down approach developed by the French government through this AMI, in Lyon, to foster the emergence of innovation in the construction of sustainable neighborhoods. What are the outcomes in terms of collaboration between actors? How is citizen involvement encouraged in such a project? How are citizens’ aspirations for involvement met in such a large-scale project.

To do so, this research will be based on the presentation of some theoretical positions.

Then case study investigating the integration of innovations in the creation of urban fabric in the Lyon Living Lab project will be conducted along with a complementary case study about a participatory housing project. These two approaches will then be discussed in relation to theory for some key lessons to be drawn.

(13)

11

2 Methodology

2.1 Material

2.1.1 Literature review

To conduct this research, the idea was first to do a review of the existing literature relating to sustainable development and planning, to innovation in the construction of cities and about citizen participation in planning projects. I then set a special focus planning practice in France and on the regulation framing citizen involvement on traditional projects and on participatory housing projects.

2.1.2 Internship

In order to truly immerge in the design of an urban renewal project in France, I did a 6 months internship with a French real estate developer called Bouygues Immobilier.

Bouygues S.A. is an industrial group created in 1952 and specializing in construction, in media and in telecommunications. Bouygues Immobilier was created in 1999 to become the Land development subsidiary of the group and develops retail, residential and office projects in France but also abroad for instance in Spain, Poland and Morocco.

Since 2006, Bouygues Immobilier developed a policy in favor of sustainable development, leading to the creation of UrbanEra in 2011. UrbanEra is defined as “a tailored response to the expectations of local authorities for the construction of a new generation of sustainable neighborhoods with a strong positive-energy component and a new service offering”

(UrbanEra, 2016).

I worked as an intern manager of real estate programs within UrbanEra focusing on the development of three land slots in Confluence. The project consists of the creation of a mixed block of around 31 000 m² of retails, offices and housing. The construction of eleven buildings is the operational translation of the research conducted by the LLL project. Indeed, it is the testing ground for the development of innovations in order to create an industrial demonstrator of the sustainable city in the neighborhood. The idea there is to implement innovative solutions in the neighborhood to encourage the emergence of new urban uses but also to reach more sustainability in the construction of urban fabric.

Thanks to my involvement in the building project, I got the opportunity to meet with the various actors involved in the LLL innovation research process. I could attend meetings and workshops aiming at identifying the stakes, the shared ambitions, the projects developed and their governance. The strong environmental performance ambitions of the project, coupled with the will to develop new uses for urban dwellers, led to a wild range of topics for innovation. Indeed, a large group of partners, with various characteristics and backgrounds (public, private, institutional, industrial, startups…) were committed to find innovative solutions. I got the opportunity to meet with various actors, thus getting insights on their perspectives.

(14)

12 2.1.3 Visit and interview

This position also enabled me to identify key actors in the development of participatory housing projects.

In order to get insights about the expectations and barriers encountered by those involving in participatory housing projects, I visited and interviewed one participant of a project.

This person is a member of the Choux Lents project, a participatory housing project developed in the suburbs of Lyon. During this interview, I could ask her on the motives that led the group to collaborate in the project. I also interviewed her about the obstacles that they faced to fulfill their ambitions and about the strategies that they developed to work together to reach a common project and shared values.

2.2 Methods

My ambition with this research, was at first to do a case study about the Lyon Living Lab project and to find generalization about the development of innovations in planning practice to create sustainable neighborhoods. However, after some research on case study methodology it appeared that generalization from a single case can be limited. I then decided to use my interview of the Choux Lents actors to do a case study researching the ambitions of people involved in participatory housing projects to assess citizen aspirations in such projects. I used an abductive reasoning process to do “Naturalistic Generalization”

as presented by Johansson (Johansson, 2003), using this particular example to base the analysis of participation as developed in the LLL project. I indeed used one case to generalize the aspirations of people engaging in co-housing projects. This one case therefore was the basis for my definition of aspirations and also gave me insights with the obstacles that are faced in the implementation of such projects.

2.3 Limitations

Playing a part in the development of the project was definitely a strong advantage to carry out this research. Indeed, it allowed me to be immersed in the discussions between the various actors and thus to obtain a thorough and authentic view of their exchanges and their own issues. However, it might have also been an obstacle to be part of the project in the impartiality of the analysis. I tried to keep an objective focus regarding the outcomes of the projects developed in terms of citizen involvement and development of new uses.

The lack of quantitative data, due to the early stage of development of the process was also one key obstacle to this study.

(15)

13

3 Theoretical positions

3.1 Sustainable development and planning

3.1.1 Three pillars of sustainability

The definition of sustainable development originates in the Bruntland report of 1987, stating that « Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. » (Unites Nation General Assembly, 1987 Chapter 2).

This definition has been completed and the most common understanding of the concept is the representation of three circles, one standing for ecology, another one for economy and the last one for social. Sustainability is the reunion of these three concepts. To reach sustainability, some behaviour need to be threefold, respecting the environment, being economically viable and being socially acceptable. This approach is traditionally transmitted via the Venn diagram from figure 1 that is the most common representation of sustainability.

This basic concept has then been developed, leading to various definitions among which the definition of sustainable lifestyles given by the Stockholm Environment Institute :

« Sustainable lifestyles are patterns of actions and consumption, used by people to affiliate and differentiate themselves from others, which: meet basic needs, provide a better quality of life, minimize the use of natural resources and emissions of waste and pollutants over the lifecycle, and do not jeopardise the needs of future generations » (Scott, 2009, p.1).

Social

Environment Economic

Sustainable development

Figure 1: Venn diagram illustrating the three pillars of sustainability

(16)

14

The topics that can be affected by sustainability therefore got more and more precise, and the concept could then be more applied to practical fields. For instance, sustainability issues in line with the creation of urban fabric can be declined in the practice. In order to do so, the three pillars can each be specifically considered.

Enhancing social sustainability, working on the environmental performances of the area but also on its economic viability are therefore the three main tasks that planners face.

These three principles are the ones that are sought for in the development of sustainable neighbourhoods (Souami, 2012).

3.1.2 Resilience Theory

The concept of sustainability can be linked with the concept of resilience, introduced by Holling in 1973 and then more thoroughly defined by Walker and al as the “Capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and re-organize while undergoing change as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity and feedbacks” (Walker and al, 2004 in Folke, 2006 : 7). One way to view sustainability is to envision a development that has permanency across time, that will last for a long time and has enough quality to withstand time. Resilience theory is a way for planners to appraise the capacity of an area to withstand disturbances both foreseeable and unpredictable. Understanding the drivers of change is required to improve the resilience of the system and can orient the policies implemented. Analyzing the ability of a system to cope with disturbances, in a way explores the persistence of said system and resilience then appears as a desirable feature when seeking sustainability.

The concept of resilience was first based on the observation that human society and its environment are codependent. For instance, atmospheric CO2 concentration, water use and biodiversity loss all follow the same path of evolution across time, with a rapid increase from the 1950’s. This evolution is the one from the world population, as human beings influence ecosystems, at a local scale but also at a wider one. This entwinement is deep as human processes in turn rely on some services that are provided by ecosystems and the environment. However, the ability of the planet to provide these ecosystem services is not indefinite and this observation based the work of some ecologists in the 1960’s. They started to study Social-Ecological Systems (SES) in order to put a “Humans-in-nature perspective” (Folke et al, 2010) to their research. These SES are complex as built from different kinds of elements which have interactions and create a system with a behavior that can’t be predicted (that emerge). They are also adaptive systems in the sense that they can change when confronted to a stress. These systems are also interconnected and a change in one part can lead to changes elsewhere.

The study of SES and the way they adapt to disturbances based Resilience thinking, with the observation that most systems have several stable regimes that share a set of similar characteristics (identities, functions, structure, feedbacks). Some indicators called state variables describe the state of the system and evolve when changes occur in the system. At some point, when the changes in the system are too big, the regime can change, leading to

(17)

15

a regime shift. The system can then evolve to a different stable regime that has more or less similar characteristics. These regime shifts occur when the state variable crosses a certain threshold.

To enhance its resilience, an SES needs three main characteristics: persistence, adaptability and transformability. Adaptability illustrates the ability of the actors, within the system to influence the resilience of the system. Transformability is the ability of the system to change and create a whole new system in case of a strong enough disturbance.

Examples are taken by resilience theorists such as Walker and Salt (2006:111) with John Weatherstone, an Australian Farmer who successfully enhanced the resilience of its exploitation. In the 1980’s, his farm suffered from an extreme drought and he tried to figure out if it was to recover and how long it would need. “John concluded that if his farm, Lyndfield Park was to have any future, he needed to change what he was doing”. He decided to adapt his agriculture model: “from grazing sheep to growing tree and grazing cattle” and concluded that his new model was better at copping with extreme natural events.

When applying the theory to a city, that is viewed as the SES, it appears that diversity and change are desirable features for cities to cope with environmental conditions and other unexpected events.

The main criticism to the model is that it has become used as a “boundary object” between fields that don’t always have the same definition of the concept. For example, it is accused of enabling to “coordinate different groups without a consensus about their aims and interests”(Brand & Jax, 2007 : 9). Another issue that is pinpointed is that some research tends to lose the true meaning of Social Ecological System and focus only on the social part.

Moreover, there is a tendency to view Resilience as a desirable feature but the issue of desirability of the current state of a system should be raised. Some could argue that a sustainable city is a city that has no permanent print, which uses can be adapted to the needs of new users. Such a problem is illustrated by the presence of many brownfields that mark the urban landscape and are a true challenge for planners.

Whatever the position and the definition of sustainability that is retained, the necessity of adapting planning practice to the evolution of the society is immanent.

3.2 Innovation in the construction of the city

One way to change these practices is to innovate. The word “innovation” is currently widely used in daily life and is often presented as the overarching goal of any intellectual process and as the answer to any problem. However, much like resilience, the meaning of this world is not simple and can vary among people and research fields. There seems to be a general understanding that innovation is the creation of something new. But something that is new is not automatically an innovation as it should also create value.

(18)

16

The economic definition, “Innovation: The process of creating a product or service solution that delivers significant new customer value” (Ulwick, 2005) seems to illustrate the most common current understanding of the word.

Innovation originates in the Latin verb “Innovare” which means to get back to and thus do not correspond to the meaning that it currently takes. Innovation has long only been related to technological change due to technical invention or scientific discovery.

Since the turn of the 20th century, a change of paradigm led to a broadening of the signification of the word: “Innovation is the embodiment, combination, and/or synthesis of knowledge in novel, relevant, valued new products, processes, or services” (Leonard &

Swap, 1999). Indeed, services are getting an ever-larger portion of the economy, leading companies to develop new models of innovation. Open innovation, as described by Henry Chesbrough, is one of them and is a new way that industrial research and development changes to become a process that is more open, with more contributions coming from the outside of the company and leading to more ways for ideas to be launched in the market (Chesbrough, 2010).

3.2.1 Technological innovation: Information and communication technologies (ICTs)

The confusion between innovation as a process and technological innovation, in addition to the development of new technologies and the changes they triggered in society lead to considering the outcomes of the numeric revolution as a key innovation of planning practice.

3.2.1.1 Information and communication technologies

Technologies can be seen as one of the main drivers for evolution of the urban environment. This strong connection dates back to the early industrial age with the introduction of railroad that triggered urban growth in the middle of the 19th century.

Electricity, elevator, telephone, automobiles are other examples of technologies whose introduction led to changes in urban form and expansion of cities. Illustrations of this tendency can be found in the history of Stockholm. Indeed, after WWII the introduction of subway lines in the city led to the implementation of a Multi-Family Housing Regime (Gullberg & Kaijser, 2004). This regime led to the creation of “ABC suburbs” that provided both Work (A, Arbete), Housing (B, Bostäder) and Commercial centers (C). The model of these ABC suburbs started to shape the region of the Swedish Capital. From 1965 to the 1970’s, the introduction of cars but also the development of prefabrication and functionalism accompanied the development of the “Million homes program”. This program in turn led to the development of a strong housing program with multi story buildings in which all apartments were identical and where cars were needed to access Cars and the development of the importance given to them intensified in the 1970’s with a change of paradigm and the emergence of a new model: “Villa, Volvo och Vovve”

(House, Car and Dog). Urbanism for and by cars started with the creation of national networks of highways and the building of suburbs and scattered houses throughout the territory.

(19)

17

In the 1990’s, the concept of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT’s) emerged with the introduction of the idea of “Information Revolution” as a modern version of the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century. These technologies are presented by Castell as being everywhere and pervading every aspect of our lives (Castells, 1996).

Though the omnipresence of these technologies was quickly acknowledged, their implications were, at first and are still difficult to pinpoint. The characteristics of these technology are “rapid change, and the invisibility and complexity of ICT infrastructure”

(Maeng & Nedović-Budić, 2008 : 2).

3.2.1.2 A city based on ICTs

Several concepts of cities based on ICTs have been developed across time, building themselves on Metaphors and with various levels of connectivity between places and people. From the Wired City of Dutton in 1987, where households and businesses were connected to the city through “highways” that supply services based on ICT’s, to the Intelligent city of Batty in 1990 with a city which gains competitive advantages based on a fully connected city and ICT networks. Other metaphors were developed such as the city of Bits of Mitchell in 1999, the Network cities of Townsend in 2001… to the Smart City concept, explained by Picon in his book Smart city: spatialized intelligence first published in France in 2013.

3.2.1.2.1 Picon’s Concept of a Smart City

Picon (2013) describes Smart Cities as both a new ideal and a set of practical processes for experimentation and transformation of urban fabric. These processes and ideal are inherently technological, political and social. The aspirations within the ideal of Smart City are the creation of a more efficient city in which the infrastructures would work better. Another aspect would be to create a city that is more energetically sober and finally the creation of a more challenging and stimulating city in which the quality of life would be better.

The basis for the development of such an ideal city is technical. The actors that play an important part in the development of smart cities are from different backgrounds and can be divided into three groups. The first one would be the historical actors first involved in this numeric revolution such as the main numeric companies: IBM and Cisco which got involved since the turn of the century.

Another group of actors that can be identified are the one who support public action. At first municipalities and elected representatives placed themselves as clients of the industrial groups but they started to be leaders in that matter, advocating for a deeper integration of innovations within projects.

Finally, the last group that emerges gravitates around data and the various uses that can be developed from them. This group is mainly made of startup companies that develop applications in order to create new services from these data. Indeed, the overrepresentation of information, and its collection leads to the creation of a massive database that use is not always precise or efficient. Creating new services thanks to the combination of several

(20)

18

types of data can be a way to offer a more efficient city for instance in term of energy use, but also about environmental matters such as air quality.

Another key aspect of such a city is the user who plays a central part in the development and implementation of the innovation. To be connected to their environment, individuals use their Smartphone as a link to all these services.

3.2.1.2.2 Emergence of a new experience of the city

The introduction of numeric technologies led to different theories about the place and the role given to space. Indeed, at first, there was a theory developed that the role of physical space would be minimized in favor of online space.

However, the experience showed that there is an actual hybridization of these two elements. ICT’s are included in the physical space and they participate in the activation of space for example through WIFI connections. Geolocation is also a key to this integration as it opens the possibilities to increased reality which is an important aspect of the experience of a connected city.

The epistemology underlying the comprehension of the city has evolved across time and the material city has for long been seen as the built object. With the industrial revolution, the notion of network and flows emerged. Within the numerical city there is a change of paradigm with the emphasis on the representation of situations and occurrences.

Everything that happens leaves a mark and information about this occurrence is recorded via captors. From all these information, scenarios can be drawn and for instance maps showing the traffic conditions at a given time. Scenarios can be designed about the future of the city and become decision making support tools.

Smart cities are also a place where non-humans forms of intelligence can emerge. Their association with human intelligence can lead to the creation of new forms of collective intelligence.

3.2.1.2.3 ICT for sustainability?

Though the integration of ICT’s in urban fabric appears as a way to increase the efficiency of the city, the issue of their sustainability can be raised. When overlooking at energy efficiency, the matter of energy consumption linked to the use of technological devices appears (Fettweis & Zimmermann, 2008).

Another aspect of sustainability that can be questioned with the development of ICT’s is the position of citizens. The development of ICT raises the issue of surveillance, of the use made of the data collected. On that matter, Picon explains that two different ideals can emerge. The first is a top down ideal of control of what happens in the city. The idea is to instigate the scenarios that appear more desirable. An example of the implementation of such an ideal is the creation of the operational center in the city of Rio. However, there is a counterpart to this approach of the city as it seems to lose its focus on citizens as human beings who are to physically experience their city. To counter these flows, some bottom up, spontaneous collaborative projects tend to emerge, as new ideals for city production.

(21)

19

The change of paradigm in the definition of innovation also led to the appearance of new processes of innovation, such as a bottom up approach based on uses or an “open innovation” process. The emergence of these new approaches is also consistent with the development of new workspaces such as co-working spaces or fab labs that introduce more flexibility, encourage team work and co-working.

(22)

20

3.3 Citizen participation and involvement of people in planning projects

Technological innovations, based on ICT’s or not, are not the only way to create innovation in the planning process. Public participation is mandatory in the French Urbanism Code but actual inclusion of the citizen in the planning process is still quite hard to develop. Institutions and authorities that are responsible for the development of urban projects tend to view citizen implication as a mere response to the regulatory context instead of trying to develop an actual inclusion of the users and their collaboration in the definition of the project.

3.3.1 Various levels of participation

One of the articles setting the theoretical ground foundations of citizen participation dates back to 1969 and is the one from Sherry R. Arnstein, called “A ladder of citizen participation” (see figure 2). In this article, published in an American magazine addressed to planners, she conceptualizes a “ladder of participation” based on the analysis of several federal programs in terms of “urban renewal, antipoverty and model cities” (Arnstein, 1969 : 216). In this article, citizen participation is defined as “participation of the governed in their government” and is presented as “the cornerstone of democracy”. She then develops a ladder symbolizing eight levels of participation, variating from non- participation to degrees of citizen power.

Figure 2: « Eight Rungs on a Ladder of Citizen participation » (Arnstein, 1969 :217)

With her illustration, she aims at demonstrating the existence of several levels of participation. The two bottom rungs are levels of ‘non-participation’, were people feel like they are included while the real purpose of the process is to “enable powerholders to

(23)

21

"educate" or "cure" the participants” (Arnstein, 1969: 217). The next three levels, are described as “tokenism”, thus aiming at symbolically give the impression of inclusiveness and diversity. In these rungs, the power given to citizens is illusory as they get to listen and be heard but consultation and information doesn’t grant them any power and though they can express their position and desires, those are not assured to be considered by powerholders. While growing up the ladder, the power given to citizen increases and the decision-making process becomes more inclusive, thus leading to partnerships, where citizen have a saying and can engage in negotiation and seek compromise with those in charge of a project. The top of the ladder are processes of delegated power and citizen control where the citizens gets to access decision making power.

This typology based on the power given to citizen illustrates the limits of the participatory approach developed in the 1960’s with Public opinion polls, neighbourhood meetings and public hearings that were just “symbolic” (Baqué & Gauthier, 2011: 37). Arnstein advocated for participation approaches that be more in favour of partnership, delegation of power and citizen control, the three top rungs of the ladder. Though Arnstein based her theory on the power of the “have-nots” and their ability to reclaim power from powerholders and thus getting the right to decide, this approach can be extended to the concern to encourage public participation in spatial planning and town planning, which, in France, dates back to the 1960s.

3.3.2 Collaborative planning

To foster public participation, actors of the construction of cities need to find ways to communicate with citizens that are not professionals of one sector and to help people from various backgrounds to connect and share.

Collaborative planning is a framework that has been developed by scholars such as Innes

& Booher (2003) and Healey (2007). Innes & Booher also developed a method called

“Authentic dialogue” to foster collaboration between actors with opposed interests.

Indeed, there is a general understanding that differences in the interests of stakeholders lead to strong opposition when they are presented with a situation of collaboration.

Watson (2003) mentions a “clash of rationalities, or the differences in world-view between the various parties involved” (Watson, 2003, 402) and Campbell (2006) asserts that

“individual liberties may conflict and are themselves limited by circumstances”

(Campbell, 2006, 95). Diverging aims and opposing concerns exist between people who are involved in a planning project, and this triggers differences in their comprehension of the project and in their involvement. The involvement in a project raises the feeling of belonging and they start to be “Part of and also caring for a specific place, seeing the interests of the place to be one’s own interests” (Metzger, 2013, 788). Different theories were produced to explain these different positions of actors and to address this issue in the planning process.

Collaborative planning sees planning as an actual process, and Healey (2003) bases her book called Collaborative Planning on the assertion that governance is “processes by societies and social groups, manage their collective affairs” (Healey, 2003, 104). A

(24)

22

network of interdependence of interests and interaction between actors with different ambition leads to a system of “shared identities, shared meanings, new heuristics and innovation” (Innes & Booher, 2003, 39).

3.3.2.1 Power of dialogue

From the situation with different actors with different ambitions and interests the overall goal of the planner is to reach a common understanding of the project and to make them share a common goal. However, the possibility of getting to a common goal is not a general agreement among scholars. Indeed, some do not see dialogue as powerful enough to overcome the differences: “it is difficult to believe that any amount of discussion or conflict resolution could overcome the divide and achieve consensus: differences go far beyond speech-level misunderstandings or an unwillingness to see the others’ point of view” (Watson, 2003, 402). On the contrary, “a context-dependent common worldview and interests among a preference group” (Flyvbjerg, 2002, 356) appear to exist for some.

Two opposing concept exist about the possibility for actors to overcome their differences but “assumption remains that these differences can be overcome through debate in a consensus-seeking process” (Watson, 2003, 398).

Dialogue is presented to be a tool to allow stakeholders to work on their differences to look for a common goal. For scholars who think that this can be achieve, dialogue appears as the most efficient method. Innes & Booher (2003) developed a framework called

“Authentic dialogue” to work towards agreement.

3.3.2.2 Authentic dialogue

Collaboration is presented as “the only way to solve problems”. Authentic dialogue needs some basic requirements to be implemented: the staff in charge of the organisation of public events need to work as a facilitator. There are also qualities needed from the participants who should first have legitimacy to act as representative of the interest they claim to defend. They should also only make sincere, comprehensible and accurate statements. From this basis, authentic dialogue will be able to install between the actors, leading to learning, creativity, reciprocity and the establishment of relationships, and not only conflicts (Innes & Booher, 2003). With the development of this framework of action, the system will adapt, leading to the establishment of “shared identities”, “shared meanings”, “new heuristics”, and “innovation” and therefore to the creation of a common goal (see figure 3).

(25)

23

Figure 3: Authentic Dialogue as framed by Innes & Booher (2003)

The efficiency of the Authentic Dialogue framework is that it turns conflicts and oppositions between stakeholders into a strength, dialogue is presented as a tool that

“helps each participant to articulate his identity as stakeholders and as individual” (Innes

& Booher, 2003, 41). Citizen participation can therefore benefit from the application of such a concept, especially as planner face difficulties in involving people: “too often as organizers, we are just sounding the loon call – and we wonder why only the loons show up to our meetings! And in fact, everybody’ll come. We just need to find their call.”

(Forester, 2012, 20). To get more people involved in planning processes, planners need to find out a way to get people involved by targeting their personal interests. This will allow them to improve the outcomes of consultation processes and thereafter to create urban fabric that fits the expectation of the people it is meant for.

(26)

24

4 Citizen participation and involvement of people in French planning

The notion of public participation goes against the traditional rational approach to planning approach developed especially in France.

4.1 History of planning process in France

Planning law is a quite recent law as the world “urbanism” appeared in the late 19th century. Planning law has no European definition and is left to the sovereignty of States.

Yet European treaties have some influence on specific topics embedded within planning policies such as environmental legislation, public information....

Indeed, in France, urban planning has inherited a "substantialist conception of the general interest of the French Jacobin State - an immanent general interest which has a content, a substance and is defined by the State (elected, officials)” (Baqué & Gauthier, 2011: 42).

The introduction of a rational global planning practice in France in the 1950’s and 60’s leaf to important interventionism and state centralism that produced major large scale planning operations.

In France, the historical territorial division is based on regions, divided in departments divided in boroughs, townships and communes. All these scales of divisions are administrative and are not relevant for every aspect of the administration of the country.

Indeed, when it comes to city planning, the 3 main scales to consider are the regional level, the department level and the municipality level. The competences of these various levels of administration are different and complementary with a key principle of free administration of the different levels.

Until the 1980’s the state had the town planning authority. For instance, the control of constructions was practiced by the DDE (Departmental Direction of Equipment) who oversaw approving building permits. In 1985, the decentralization of urban competence was decided and the scale of the municipality was chosen to pursue this competence.

4.2 Introduction of citizen participation

The transfer of competences from the state was organized by the laws from the 7th of January and 22nd of July 1983 that were modified by the laws from the 25th of January 1985 and 6th of January 1986. This transfer of competences to local authorities is based on a system of transfer of blocks of skills to avoid scattering competences and the law of the 12^th of july 1983 also defines the modalities of ‘public enquiry’ that is mandatory for several kinds of planning projects.

The planning legislation used to be perceived as the law of the land with separate laws for maters of transport, of housing, of environment, of city planning, of urbanism and of patrimony. The principle of independence of legislations kept links from being created between all these topics until the year 2000 with the enforcement of the SRU law (Solidarity and Urban Renewal). In France, the planning legislation is based on the Code

(27)

25

of Urbanism which is enforced at the national level so planning law is the same all around the country. This Code is a set of tools that can be used and defines the nature and content of the various planning documents that are issued at different scales. Article L300-2 of the Urbanism Code states that a public consultation process is mandatory in most of the projects that are subject to the approval of a construction permit or another kind of planning approval. This process is regulated and is to grant people access to all information about the project, and allow them to comment and give proposition about the plan that is proposed. The idea is that all their reaction would be recorded and passed along to the authority in charge of the plan so that these opinions would be taken into consideration in the final project.

The general principles of the approach can be found in the Charter for consultation set up by the Ministry of Land Use Planning and the Environment in 1996 (MATE, 1996):

- Consultation must start before the project;

- Consultation should be as broad as possible;

- Consultation is implemented by the public authorities;

- Consultation requires transparency;

- Consultation facilitates participation;

- The concertation is organized around steps in line with the progress of the project;

- Consultation requires the presence of a guarantor;

- The concertation is the subject of balance sheets.

This charter was introduced to complement and improve the application of the 1983 law about public participation.

There is a variety of applications to citizen participation. Compulsory participation, as defined in the Urbanism Code is the most classical approach, with a public inquiry aimed at informing about the project, gathering assessments of the proposition and suggestions of citizen, before the final version of the project is established. The legislative framework has grown more open, stating objectives but leaving the actors a lot of freedom in application of the process. Concertation is however not limited to this compulsory approach, and some public initiatives also emerge. Local authorities try to take initiatives to involve the local population, often trying to foster community life in neighborhoods (Devaux, 2015).

Private actors also tend to take part in such a process as it tends to promote a better sharing of projects and mutual understanding between residents, customers, customers, employees, ...

In line with the desire for participation in projects, citizens also see their will for the development of their own way of living by creating housing facilities that they can relate to.

(28)

26

4.3 Participatory housing regulation for projects in France

Participatory housing projects are not wildly spread in France, and the institutional framework ruling its application is recent and not really specific.

Participatory housing is based on a civic approach that allows a group of inhabitants to associate, sometimes with the support of a social landlord or a promoter, to participate in the design, the day-to-day management of a building intended for their dwelling. To promote the development of this model that is quite alternative and innovative in France, the ALUR law (law for Access to Housing and Renovated Urbanism) of March 2015 has given participatory housing a status, recognition and a legal framework. The Minister emphasized that "the dynamics of participatory habitat contributes to strengthen the social links and concretely improve living together, placing at the heart of projects the values of solidarity and of mutual assistance " (Pinel, 2015).

On the 21^st of December 2015, an enforcement order relating to participatory housing societies was released. This specifies the functioning of two new legal forms of participatory housing projects (self-promotion and residents' associations) but without prohibiting other forms of projects to emerge. In particular, it defines:

- the terms of renting the furnished dwellings;

- the possibility of transferring or donating shares in the company;

- the conditions for withdrawal of a partner

The existing condominium are also given the possibility to adapt their status.

Despite the release of the last decree on the Financial Guarantee, it is still difficult today to develop projects in participatory housing. Indeed, it should be appreciated that many difficulties remain to gain the confidence of banks and insurers that are too concerned with the risks taken.

To improve the development of participatory housing project, some municipalities organize call for projects, devoting a budget and land to actors willing to develop an innovative project of participatory habitat. For instance, in 2010, in Paris, the Local habitat program was adopted with a strong inclination to support participatory housing. In 2012, a charter called “Paris Charter for the Development Participative Habitat” proposed a provision of public land and financial assistance for project promoters. In the spring of 2014 three land plots were identified to host such project and the call for project was launched.

By doing so, the city aimed at:

- Supporting innovative housing projects;

- Promoting environmental quality and social innovation;

- Contributing to the development of alternative ways of building the city;

- Promoting housing design outside of standardized habitat models.

(29)

27

The process developed identified three land plots and allocated a devoted team to coach and train the groups interested through 3 steps, each one leading to some selection. The idea was to allow groups of people to be formed and propose a project of several dwellings in accordance to the capacity of the land. After the process of selection, three groups were identified based on their motivation, the quality of their community living project but also on the architectural quality of their project.

This kind of incentive is a way to promote participative housing but do not allow for every person interested to develop a project. Indeed, the strong selection led to a lot of frustration among participants. The model of participatory housing is therefore still to be invented by the various actors of the production of the city.

(30)

28

5 Case study - Confluence – Lyon – France 5.1 Legal framework

To reach sustainability, the French government bets on innovation with the development of incentives for collectivities to develop innovative neighborhoods. In October 2015, the French government launched a call for expressions of interest (AMI) through Vivapolis and the Institute for Sustainable Cities. This AMI was established by the French Ministry for Ecology, Sustainable Development, and Energy and the Ministry for Housing, Equality of territories and Rurality. Some sixteen projects were then selected to develop an integrated process in favor of the urban character and a transversal and collaborative vision of the city.

The following broad objectives were presented (DIVD, 2015) to be the goal of such Industrial Demonstrator of the Sustainable City (DIVD):

“

- integration of different urban functions (housing, travel, energy supply, waste management ...) for greater environmental, economic and social performance;

- technical and functional innovation for a more restrained use of resources, reduced public and private costs, greater social cohesion and the development of participatory democracy;

- enhancement of expertise that may constitute references to international, and promote export competitiveness essential to businesses and French territories;

- pooling public and private partners: French construction groups, energy, start-ups, universities, public institutions, etc.”

In addition to a monetary incentive, these showcases of French know-how are also encouraged by facilitations such as a mobilization of expertise to overcome some regulatory and technical obstacles. These projects are set as testing grounds that will help the actors of city construction to develop their skills to address emerging subjects such as

“digital and collaborative cities, intensification of uses and new business models” (DIVD, 2015).

This kind of measures encourage innovation in its wild definition but can lead to different outcomes according to the actors involved, to the location and the stakes relating to these and therefore to the pilot projects they decide to implement.

5.2 Confluence: a regeneration project with high ambitions

Lyon, located in the South-East quarter of France is the second biggest city of France in terms of population (2 142 732 people in the greater Lyon area in 2009). The city of Lyon has an advanced innovation program and aims at creating a smart city with the cooperation of its citizens. To do so, 103 initiatives where engaged for « a co-smart city », and these initiatives are grouped around 4 main themes: Agility, Balance, Creativity and Humanity. The city is one of the laureate of the AMI lauched by the French institute for

(31)

29

sustainable city that aims at creating a demonstrating neighborhood. The area that has been pointed out to be that demonstrator is a district called Confluence (see figure 4). This place has an industrial past (see Appendix 1 for more details) and is currently undergoing a major urban renewal project to reclaim those brownfields and improve its bad image.

Figure 4: Localization of the project (Source of maps: Google maps)

Confluence is the most extensive urban renewal project developed in the city of Lyon.

Indeed, this project impacts some 150 hectares in the south of the peninsula. The perimeter of the project is consistent with the perimeter of the industrial enclave created during the 20th century with two main urban fractures: the railway with the Perrache train station and the highway (see figure 5). These infrastructures isolated the area from the rest of the city. The first step for this project was therefore to work on the reconnection of this enclave to the rest of the city center. To do so, the light rail line Tram T1, which terminated in Perrache since 2001, was extended on the 15th of September 2005 until Montrochet and later, on the 19th of February 2014 until Debourg thus reconnecting the Peninsula from the south to the subway system.

PARIS

LYON

Confluence district

(32)

30

The project will eventually lead to double the size of the city center. This program constructs more than 1 million square meters allowing for the housing of 5 000 more persons in 2025 and the creation of 10 000 jobs by 2025.

5.2.1 Governance

Confluence is an urban renewal project that is developed in the legal framework of a Joint Development Zone (Zone d’Aménagement Concerté – ZAC in French). This is a public/private partnership that is developed by a municipality to create a project and to associate private partners in the development of an area. This type of procedure allows local authorities to develop project without funding them but by keeping a direct control on the development.

When the ZAC was created, in 1999, the local authority created a Mixed Economy Company¹ to be in charge of the development. This entity oversaw the development of the entire project with a division in several phases. In 2008, it became the SPL Confluence, developer of the area.

The urbanism masterplan was established with several steps: first by François Grether and Michel Desvigne. To meet the ambition of the project the SPL Confluence is accompanied by several counsels such as a counsel regarding the programing of retail and offices, an urbanist cabinet, a counsel in charge of establishing the ambitions in term of sustainable development…

The image of the district, inherited from its industrial background is quite negative and the development of the project therefore needs to work on improving this image. Moreover, as a new district, developed on brownfields, there is no real inhabitant community living in the area. The SPL Confluence, thus works towards the promotion of citizen inclusion and participation within the development of the area. Aside from the mandatory public participation process that was conducted for the creation of the ZAC, these topics are addressed in the sustainability requirements handed out to developers of land plots.

5.2.2 An extensive project with a specific spatial and temporal organization

There are two main parts for this project, as shown in the map underneath. First, the renovation of the existing Perrache Sainte-Blandine neighborhood (green on Figure 5) and the re-development of the Perrache train station. The second is the development of 70 hectares of development land (mainly brownfields) divided in two temporal and geographical phases.

1 In France, a mixed economy company is an anonymous society whose capital is predominantly owned by one or several public persons (the State, a local authority or any other public institution). At least one private actor should participate in the capital.

(33)

31

Figure 5: Map of the South of the Peninsula, showing the phases of development (Source of the map: le-cartographe.net)²

The first phase, ZAC 1 (pink on figure 5) was initiated in 2003 and is almost complete today and the second phase; ZAC 2 (blue on figure 5) is currently being developed. This case study will focus on the development of phase 2 as it is the one that is currently undergoing a conception process, and more specially through 3 land plots developed by Bouygues.

5.2.2.1 Phase 1 (ZAC 1)

This phase started at the turn of the 21st century with the ambition of creating a new, modern and efficient neighborhood. The masterplan of that project was created by Atelier Ruelle, an urbanism firm with a mixt team of architects, landscapers and urbanists.

During that phase, the goal of the land developers was to create buildings that would already have the performances that would later be required by the state. Indeed, the RT 2012 (building regulation enforced since 2012 in new buildings) sets ambitions in term of

2 « le-cartographe.net » created maps of the project on behalf of the developer in order to present the project during an exhibition called « Lyon Confluence, rebirth laboratory » in November 2011.