Study on next generation communities in consideration of urban life in the years to come
Study on next generation communities in consideration of urban life in the years to come
Summary
1. Background of the study and its purpose
The history of building towns in urban regions from post-war times to the present is briefly explained here. The remodeling of cities was implemented for the reconstruction of war-ravaged areas and during the years of high economic growth, for building momentum in support of national events such as the Olympics and Expo. It was an age of infrastructure development by regional administrations and experts under national policies.
During the period from the 1970s to 1980s, it became necessary to take into consideration the strains caused by upgrading or changes in living environments in regional communities. The authorities, in taking on a coordinating role, established “Town Development Councils” mainly in regional communities made up of local residents and those at local shopping areas, etc., for the purpose of forming a regional consensus that was fair.
Since then, the real estate bubble started and land buyouts by so-called “land sharks” pushed urban residents away into suburban areas. As a result, the number of developing communities in urban regions declined. Many of the “town development councils” became conferences consisting of several of those in charge from the industries who were the landowners and those from the authorities, replacing the decreasing number of residents.
At the beginning of the 1990s, many redevelopments including waterfront developments were implemented very frequently, and international exhibitions or exchanges between cities, etc. were actively held in order to discuss the essential qualities of a city. From the latter part of the 1990s, in particular, collaboration methods involving coordination between the landowner industries and the authorities were sought. As seen above, the movement of city-type town development (urban planning) often took the form of public cooperation based on economic development and public & private partnerships, even though the movement was centered around regional communities.
At present, we see huge changes such as the arrival of a depopulating society, and it is said that Japan is moving forward towards a “steady-state society” (Note 1.) The strength of conventional regional communities has diminished as well. Moreover, consumers are keeping their wallets tightly closed. Naturally, landowner industries have been forced into a situation in which no presumption of investment recovery can be made, and enormous amounts of time and labor to be devoted to development are no longer available either. Under these circumstances, it is obvious that conventional methods of town development will not improve towns.
We fully understand that this is not a simple story, but by reviewing it, we can see that moving forward towards the “regeneration of regional communities” will be required for town development from now on. It will be a change in direction towards town development without economic growth as a background, that is, unaccompanied by speculative activities. Although the phrase “town development” is the same, it is a “town development” of totally different dimensions. There are, of course, cases in which economic growth cannot be ignored, such as central urban areas of local cities; however, as a whole, town development for the purpose of “regeneration of regional communities” means attaining “richness,” only in principle. Therefore, we should change direction by positioning ourselves so that economic growth may be possible as a part of its consequences.
Furthermore, while institutionalization is considered an urgent need by imposing “regeneration of communities” on regions, as a movement intended for “relief (for the vulnerable)” such as “town development with welfare services,” we always like to recognize this as a part of the consequences upon achievement of “richness.” Although a fundamental question still exists in the premise that there may be a limit to the “regeneration of communities” in which problem solving is imposed as an obligation, in some way, we would like to recognize the circumstances that we are currently facing as a turning point.
Now, at this turning point, it is necessary to once again confirm who the “city dwellers” are, as well as another question of what the “richness” of these dwellers will be. If we consider such “city dwellers” as “next generation communities,” we must predict how the activities will function in times when society is heading towards a stabilized society.
In the process of confirming the above mentioned points, the standpoints of this study are set as in the following.
Standpoint 1
As the primary standpoint, we would like to specify that “city dwellers” who participate in town development will include, in addition to those who reside in that city, those who are an “essential part of city life” such as those who work there and are consumers there, or those who simply call it their own. In fact, these people are the ones who have actually been involved in the city culture or hustle and bustle on the streets, as major players in town development. It can be said that these people have never had a chance to participate in town development (urban planning.) They were simply the subjects of analysis and referred to as “consumers” by experts. Although some who were leaders in the fashion or music worlds were brought in due to their propaganda value in appealing to the mass media, their decisions were not taken into account individually but simply utilized as an indication of the market trend. The most important constituent members in future town developments are not those who are listed on the tax payment list such as for the inhabitant taxes or business taxes, but those who spend the longest time in the area.
Standpoint 2
The second standpoint of this study is the concept whereby we believe that “new generation communities” are regional communities in which the “urban dwellers” under the previous hypothesis work together with the locals towards town development, not as “consumers,” but as “producers” (not in terms of economic production/development, but in terms of feeling comfortable or attached). In fact, they are not communities of those interested in “asset value,” but communities of those interested in “richness.” In other words, they are made up of “people who have switched roles from onlookers to players.”
Standpoint 3
The third standpoint of this study is that town development is an activity aiming to attain “richness,” which is not “hard” in nature. It is very difficult to define “richness” that is not hard. It is difficult to adopt conventional simple logic that “any ‘increase’ is good in the same way that increased “asset value” is good.” When the sets of values people hold are bundled into the concept of “richness,” they become vague. When we question “what we should do” for richness, the more specific it becomes, and the more individual differences will be created. We must at least acknowledge that it is an area in which the simple formation of a strong unanimous agreement, namely that “we must do,” will not hold.
We believe that the town development we refer to here is a place of voluntary participation moved by “creativity.” What can we do to attain our own “richness”? Could this lead to the “richness of communities”? We assume that town development is a “project” that generates some sort of slow gatherings, by confirming and acknowledging individual differences.
Assuming that we view conventional town development from the above 3 standpoints, we realize that it is not appropriate to restrain “condition setting” with issues such as why I should participate in town development even though I am not a resident, or what plan I am here for, or how we can work to form an agreement, or we all must implement this plan equally. If consensus is easily obtained, or if corrections are made right away when a problem is found, or if we gather together to discuss something, we will have a good time. It is desirable to create such a place.
When we recall what sort of “place” it could be, we find that it is not necessarily true that we have never had such a place before. For example, it can be a place where people created the town culture or fashion, and while events occurred depending on the place or the age respectively, the “place” can be quite simply seen as an extension of these.
If conventional town development councils were established for the “public” part of “public and cooperation,” that is, administrative institutions, to obtain the residents’ agreement in order to execute their management responsibilities, there are already certain things in towns in another dimension, as “cooperation,” seen in commercial facilities, streets, station plazas, or SNS or events themselves, and they still continue to exist. We believe that we should simply take these two factors into consideration in the same dimension of “public and cooperation.” Put simply, we would like to insist that it is just fine to unite “cooperative” activities for future town development.
The main purpose of this study is not to prepare a manual to establish new activity organizations, nor extract the know-how to create hubs. It is in essence an extraction of “town management” in a wider sense that will rehabilitate future regional communities. It is also “community management,” in which techniques are learned through various regional “cooperative” activity case examples, and existing “cooperative” activities in various regions that lead to town development.
With respect to the regeneration of central urban areas in the USA, regeneration projects were implemented using artists or creators and so on, based on the concept that “town development to individualize the area” was effective. According to the research study by Mr. Arata Endo (Note 2), although methods varied on a case-by-case basis, depending on each regeneration theme, bringing in “another person” who was able to become deeply involved in the region, besides community residents and authorities who were making no progress, was successful in every region. In other words, a third party played the role of a driving force.
The Urban Design Center is positioned as a hub of activities that operates “community management.” It is a place that promotes town development with high usability, through workshops, etc. and through increasing numbers of people involved. In Japan, Mr. Takeshi Kitazawa (Note 3) started to work with Kashiwa-no Ha and the Urban Design Center in Yokohama. With a “Coalition of Public, People and University” as a principle, universities are the centerpiece to proceeding with the work of community development (support) by making a coalition with various people such as artists and NPO, as well as civic organizations, based on the region.
Furthermore, in 2009, seven universities: Yokohama National University, Yokohama City University, Tokyo University of the Arts, Kanagawa University, Kanto Gakuin University, Tokai University, and Kyoto Seika University, collaborated and established “Kitanaka School,” in Yokohama, as a hub to train specialists on new town development.
In this way, it can be said that the research organizations of universities are currently the centerpiece in practicing “community management” in Japan.
However, very few cases connect “cooperative” activities with “town development” as the subject of the community study. Rather, many are under the study theme of more or less “relief” such as regional revitalization or town development with welfare services. Although it is a very important function to foster helpful functions of the communities, it is not the theme of this study. The theme of this study is “discovery” in order to connect “cooperative” activities with future town developments.
The partner of this study, Mr. Norio Iguchi (Professor at School of Cultural and Creative Studies, Aoyama Gakuin University, Director of Society-Academy Collaborative Research and Education Center (SACRE) of the said university, and also Director of NPO Shibuya Aoyama Landscape Formation Organization (SALF) has been working on the activity of “community management,” both publicly and privately, which has developed into the practice of “Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” (started as Educational GP by Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (high-quality promotional program of university education),) and a new challenge of working with a new axis called “media” has been launched. This is because we assume that youth culture is always created by the mutual interaction between the “media” and youth.
It is assumed that the “cooperative” activities in next generation communities can be highlighted, by observing the “Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” from the above-mentioned 3 standpoints.
The characteristics are shown in the following.
[Standpoint 1] “Next generation communities” --- Hands-on people who create city culture or hustle and bustle on the streets
With the Society-Academy Collaborative Research and Education Center (SACRE) of Aoyama Gakuin University as the centerpiece, and involving the authorities, corporations, and citizens (residents), they will form an execution organization as part of the educational curriculum for students, with the help of specialists who are active in the region. While setting curriculums, etc. that perform creative activities outside the school, activities such as “town development,” “interchange between regions,” and “creation of regional culture” will be implemented, based on the region.
[Standpoint 2] Fostering players by “next generation communities”
Local communities, corporate managers in the region, creators, artists, and pros in the media industry such as video media technicians, announcers, and celebrities create communities and strive to foster players by practically training the students. It is a more automonous place to learn, transcending the boundaries of learning by conventional school education.
[Standpoint 3] Creative and practical activities
“Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” which also has an NHK Studio on its premises has inherited the DNA of the Aoyama/Shibuya area, which has been a transmitting hub for various cultures, and a number of projects are being implemented as the creative and transmitting hub for new cultures in the years to come. There, creative challenges are being developed with an eye towards the future of media, such as the production of programs or planning and production of events, etc. in which the students take part in the planning,
This study, “Study on next generation communities in consideration of urban life in the years to come” will create a report on a series of activities at the “Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” as the “next generation communities” which are communities fostering the “richness of urban life” in a stabilized society, and look into the “community management” of “cooperative” activities in town development in the future.
Mr. Iguchi, in particular, has been implementing activities publicly and privately in this region, beyond the frame of the university. He believed that establishing A-Studio would be the driving force causing a paradigm shift in what a regional community should be or even educational activities of the universities by an axis known as “creative.” Instead of treating this as a particular solution, in considering communities in the years to come, it is very important to introduce such on-site methods of “community management.”
This does not necessarily mean institutionalization of new community management, or setting eligible conditions for those who are involved. It means asking how we can create an environment in which such things are possible. It could, in some way, raise the degree of tolerance of society and how we can create margins. We believe it is to acknowledge that “going out of the frame” is a good thing.
2. Study Methods
This study will be implemented in 2 years.
The study this year will be implemented in collaboration with the Society-Academy Collaborative Research and Education Center (SACRE) of Aoyama Gakuin University that operates and supports the laboratory activities of “Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio,” and LLP Machi/Communication Study Group.
The steps for this year are shown in the following.
[Step 1] Background summary
--- Standpoint on the history and town development in the Shibuya/Aoyama area
[Step 2] Concept of “next generation communities” and “cooperative” positioning in the region
--- SACRE (social positioning in the university and town development activities)
[Step 3] Function to “foster players”
--- Laboratory activities (practice as a university, and a real place to learn for students)
[Step 4] How “Cooperative” “Place” must be
--- Development of “Cooperative” “Place” by media and students
[Step 5] Area management in the matured age
--- Learn from city regeneration cases in the USA, by way of creative layers.
In particular, in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, we mainly put together an analysis of the Shibuya/Aoyama area‘s past, a history of the activities of the author himself, and the flow of activities up to the present time. In Chapter 3, we reported on the 19 laboratory activities that have been implemented up to the present time.
Because these are on-going activities, they were published as an interview with the creator who was in charge of training so that the message from the person involved in the activities would be conveyed in a passionate way.
“Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” is in the stage of early phase of activities, and we believe that a true analysis should be conducted in a few years time. Therefore, in Chapter 4, by looking at the histories of cutting edge and particular case examples, the 3 standpoints of the study will be confirmed and this will be considered the achievement for this year.
For next year, we will study “Urban Design Center (nextUDC) in the years to come” with the purpose of studying how town management should work towards a rich city life in a stabilized society, and the essence extraction for creating a hub.
Based on the study by Mr. Arata Ito (Associate Professor at Kogakuin University), who has researched many Urban Design Centers, we will study how “town management should be,” a concept which is required for regenerating weakened regional communities in Japan. In particular, to comprehend the movement, we will hear current issues and future strategies, etc., from the European and American Urban Design Centers, in order to figure out the development history by the survey performances by Mr. Endo. In doing this task, we would like to define “how next generation communities should be” and leading to “Urban Design Center (nextUDC) in the years to come” as how management should look.
3. Study Results Overview (as an interim report)
This study, “Study on next generation communities in consideration of urban life in the years to come” will report on a series of activities at the “Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” as “next generation communities” which are the communities fostering the “richness of urban life” in a stabilized society, and look into the “community management” of “cooperative” activities in town development in the future.
In particular, Mr. Iguchi has been implementing activities publicly and privately in this region, beyond the frame of the university. He believed that establishing A-Studio would be the driving force causing paradigm shift in what a regional community should be or even educational activities of the universities by the axis known as “creative.” Instead of treating this as a particular solution, in considering communities in the years to come, it is very important to introduce such on-site methods of “community management.”
This does not necessarily mean institutionalization of new community management, or setting eligible conditions for those who are involved. It means asking how we can create an environment in which such things are possible. It could, in some way, raise the degree of tolerance of society and how we can create margins. We believe it is to acknowledge that “going out of the frame” is a good thing.
The Shibuya/Aoyama area has generated creative people who have created art, street fashion, and lifestyles, and it can be said that as a result of their transmission from this region as the hub, the uniqueness of today’s Shibuya/Aoyama has been formed. “Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio” is a “cooperative” “place” in which the students, who take this region as a place to play, and the creators in this region work together. Apparently, A-Studio is not only staying to play the role of the university’s contributor to the region as a science shop, but also generating a subculture or “youth culture” and a regional community via new media that has never been seen before.
As a summary of the present stage, the following shows our view obtained by observing the studio from 3 standpoints that are the premises.
[1] Standpoint of next generation communities, “Expansion in which participants change from residents to people involved in the town”
--- residents + local creators + students
[2] Standpoint of town development, “from onlookers in the town to players”
--- Place in which people are transformed from onlookers to players
[3] Standpoint of town management, “development of a cooperation-oriented place”
--- Projects in which youth culture can be fostered are important.
With respect to [1], we introduced the case example of Aoyama Community Lab (ACL) that worked together with cultural groups, organizations, creators, artists, and cultural industry and public organizations in the Aoyama neighborhood. Having started under cooperation with a cultural organization consisting of 33 local corporations or groups, the circle is expanding. The project leader commented that he felt a sense of accomplishment when “deeper interaction with local people was realized,” or when “I think about an advertisement that ordinary people would not,” and he also mentioned that he would like to take on more projects by taking advantage of “more flexible ideas.” On the other hand, some issues have been raised, such as “no association is made with local corporations.”
The key point in [2] is whether the activities in A-Studio will be the place for students to be trained as players through projects, and in order to accomplish this target, it will be necessary to run projects on both sides, as “a place to train” and as “a place to be trained.” As described in the interview of Chapter 3 in this report as follows, “No performance evaluation will be made. The place for practice will let individuals learn autonomously,” it all comes down to creating a place “to implement ‘authentic’ projects.” Among the statements made by project leaders, the achievements of practice have been confirmed in their words, such as “Not only focusing on the improvement in abilities, we urge them to become more interested in the issues of present society,” “Students are asked to plan/prepare by themselves,” and “Personal training for junior students by senior students.” However, since the projects are implemented within a limited time of 1 year, and lab participation is made between other classes, some concerns are raised such as “It will be difficult to make them into reality within the safe environment of ‘university classes’.”
While [3] talks about the significance of the projects themselves, the issues will be how the self-motivation of students can be brought out, and whether the outcome of projects can be experimentally sent out to the world to be fostered.
Projects include “merchandise development of iphone cases,” “implementation of viral (word of mouth) marketing,” and “midnight executive committee of a book society;” however, some comments were raised, including that “meaningful activities, from the standpoint of social contribution” should be put into a project, and “universities should ‘learn’ from society.”
4. Challenges for next year
This year, we reported on the current phase, assuming that “next generation communities” implemented the activities of Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio in the Shibuya/Aoyama area. For next year, in order to put together the matters of area management by “next generation communities” and how to create a hub for community management, we will discuss the method of area management by a new public body (“cooperative” organization) by looking at case examples of city regeneration in the USA, and edit the research (by Mr. Ito) on overseas city regeneration that has been conducted thus far, into a collection of case examples of “cooperative” hubs (Urban Design Center UDC). We will re-review the practice by Aoyama Gakuin A-Studio, based on the standpoints obtained from this task, and extract “how town development management by new generation communities should be” as the essence of town development with new viewpoints in the “stabilized society” of Japan.
5. Organization of Study
This study was implemented under the organization of the following members.
Study plan/coordinate
--- [LLP Machi/Communication Study Group]
Research implementation/Analysis
--- Norio Iguchi (Professor at the School of Cultural & Creative Studies, Aoyama Gakuin University)
--- Hajime Enomoto (Director, Urban Environment Planning, Yomiko Advertising Inc.) )
--- Osamu Tomoda (LLP Machi/Communication Study Group)
Cooperation on Study
--- Keiko Ogawa (Kadobeya Co., Ltd.)
Study organizer
--- Shinichi Sentoda (Senior Researcher, Research Institute of High Life)
Note 1: “Stabilized society”
Yoshinori Hiroi, Professor in the Department of Policy Studies, Faculty of Law and Economics, Chiba University, has been involved in a vast range of activities, from strategy studies concerning social security services, medical care, environments and cities, to philosophical insights on subjects such as care, view of life and death, and time. He advocates a “stabilized society = sustainable welfare society” which integrates the environment, welfare and the economy.
“Redefining Community: connection, cities and future of Japanese society” published by Chikuma Shinsho, 2009
Yoshinori Hiroi pointed out the characteristics concerning social security services in a “Stabilized Society: Concept of new ‘richness’” published in 2001, in which (1) Social security benefits are substantially low compared with many other advanced nations; (2) Social security places a disproportionate weight on pensions, allowing less benefits towards the unemployed and children; and (3) Tax and insurance blend together in its funding. He suggested that we should seek a direction, in which not only pensions but also medical care/welfare are paid more attention and regard individual life cycles as a coordinate axis, without placing disproportionate weight on the elderly, in terms of how social security services should be in the future.
A stabilized society is a society that has zero-sum economic activity as its premise. However, Hiroi comments that this is why it is important to carry on discussions about social security services, in addition to curbing the widening economic disparity by income reallocation.
Note 2: Arata Endo
Associate Professor at Kogakuin University: PhD (Engineering)
Urban designer
Publications
Contribution in writing in “Creative Town Development in Matured City” written and edited by Norio Iguchi, with Arata Endo, Masaru Yamashita, Masafumi Ohta, Tsutomu Suzuki, Jun Hayakawa, published by Sendenkaigi Co., Ltd., March 2007
“University-based Specialists Organization to Support Town Development
“Regeneration of central urban areas in the USA/ Town Development to individualize the area” published by Gakugei Shuppansha, August 2009
Note 3: Takeru Kitazawa (1953~2009.12.22)
Urban planner, urban designer, Doctor of Engineering, and Professor at the Graduate School of Frontier Sciences at the University of Tokyo, and the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Tokyo.
Following posts such as Director of Urban Development Bureau of Yokohama City, he was appointed as a Professor at the University of Tokyo. He carried on practices and experimental studies concerning urban design and space planning. He was also active as a councilor, expert advisor and so on for local governments in Yokohama City, Kyoto Prefecture, Chiba Prefecture, etc.
Kashiwa-no Ha Urban Design Center was established on November 20, 2006, for town development in the region around the Kashiwa-no Ha Campus Station of Tsukuba Express, with special emphasis on design, and Kitazawa was the Director of the Center.
He passed away on December 22, 2009 of colorectal cancer.