Smart Talk: Alexander Ståhle, on the connection between Nordic urbanism and ‘smartification’

Rapid urbanisation and the aging of our building stock place serious strains on the quality of life in cities, and on management of big infrastructure systems. The smart city paradigm promises to combat these challenges, but it is often leaving out a fundamental fact: our cities are old. The Smart Retro approach is a novel way to develop cities, seeking ways of integrating smart solutions into existing building stock. This week in Smart Talk we hear what Alexander Ståhle thinks about Nordic urbanism and smart cities.

There are many similarities between Nordic urbanism and other western forms of urbanism (such as prioritizing cleanliness and orderliness, etc.) but Nordic urbanism also takes on a more minimal approach – focusing critically on the essence of these parameters. Do you think this Nordic urbanism provides specific potential for ‘smartification’?

I’m thinking of the World Value Survey – that’s the survey that looks at how values differ between countries in the world – and it says that the Nordic countries, and especially Sweden, are quite radical in terms of modernity and secularity. So we are basically the most open in the world to new ideas. I would say that the Nordic countries will be the countries that are the easiest to integrate new technologies in, that change everyday life and how we communicate. I mean this in terms of general openness to new systems. Open as in systems that control us. We are open to being controlled since we have this social democratic history.

We have big trust in the government and in infrastructures that make our lives simpler. And so, I think that in terms of urbanism that means that if there is a new technology, for example self-driving cars, I think we would be the country that would be the easiest to implement that sort of thing in. And in terms of smartness, I think we have to realize that advanced technologies cannot work on their own. Technology itself doesn’t make the individual freer. I think we have to understand that smart technologies have to be interconnected and they have to be planned from something like a governmental level. And there has to be infrastructure. We cannot implement smart technologies without having a publicly controlled value structure, and traffic is maybe the most basic example of that.

Do you think this provides a case study that others can look at and learn from?

Yes of course. And I think this goes back to the earlier things I said. Nordic urbanism is very much a role model for other places in the world. People are looking at what we are doing.

Do you see a barrier between urban services and the built environment or cities?

If you look at the sample patient system, I think there is a big barrier in terms of the order the infrastructure was built in for the car society. We have huge organizational companies and legislation that is set up to perpetuate car driving and car infrastructure and the car society. I think that is a very concrete case. We can see how governments, car companies, highway building developers and so on are reproducing old technologies when it comes to the car, which is a very old and inefficient infrastructure for solving mobility issues. So if you want to look at how hard it is to change a system, I would look at the transportation system and see that there are quite big stakeholders when it comes to governments and companies that don’t want change because they profit so much from the status quo.

In terms of urbanism and smart urbanism nothing will be solved with the electric car. It is a big myth that is spread not only by car companies but also by environmental organizations, who are too focused on carbon dioxide emissions. It is obvious that it is the car itself that is the big economic and social problem.”

In “The new normal or urban change” section of our Nordic Cities Beyond Digital Disruption report we identify six things that define cities of the future. What do you think is the most important thing that is going to define the cities of the future?

That is too difficult to answer. I think it is obvious that it is a combination of all those six things.

I would recommend that to take this thing, your model – if your concept does not describe the problem and the challenges when it comes to urban transportation and the car society then the model is insufficient. I think that the urban car society is the key to test your ideas. Because if you cannot identify the major problems that the car society produces for your model, then your model is not useful in terms of describing urbanism. Yes, human scale – very important for the future of transportation systems and the street and digital things and so on. But I would recommend you use the car society as a test for your concept and see if the answer still pops up with: well, electric cars could be a solution to the future city. Then, the model is wrong.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Nordic Cities Beyond Digital Disruption is a wide-spread report by KTH and Demos Helsinki led project Smart Retro. The chapters are part of a series of blog posts featuring excerpts from the report and commentary interviews by world leading experts in urban development. This text is one of the interviews that where world leading experts comment the most burning issues concerning the future of our urban life.