Barcelona, Reframing its Model as a Networked City

Barcelona has long and unique urban tradition often described as the “Modelo Barcelona” (see El Modelo Barcelona: un examen crítico) that features a capacity to treat and revitalize central urban space with interventions at the scale of streets and places; mixing with large urban projects that favor the density and compactness of urban form (see Barcelona: The Urban Evolution of a Compact City and the Barcelona Regeneration Model)and affect the city as a whole. The most apparent trace of its application are the garden city expansion of 520 street blocks planned as long ago as 1859 by Ildefons Cerdà (Plan Cerdà) now forming the Eixample district and the use of the Olympic Games as a vehicle for city-wide reforms over four neglected urban areas. In the past decade, Barcelona has undergone a new wave of major transformation with the 22@ innovation area and the Diagonal Mar hyper-community constructed on coastal brownfield and reclaimed land. These evolutions have faced major criticisms to the points of wondering whether Barcelona was losing touch with its model that beyond strict urban planning is also associated with focus on civil society as the leading dynamic in the city’s evolution. For instance, Josep Lluis Mateo of the newly created Barcelona Institute of Architecture (BIArch) claims that the history of the practice of architecture in Barcelona is more advanced than the “Modelo Barcelona” and its recent use of iconic architecture, suggesting that forms matter less than space, material, light, sensations and logic (see “Reinventaremos el modelo Barcelona“).

While in the past architects and city planners might have argued and developed the model of Barcelona, new actors are emerging as driving forces of the evolution of the city, its infrastructure and quality of life. For instance, the innovation and eGovernment Department at Barcelona City Council has unveiled their “Smart City” model for using information and communication technologies to improve its residents’ quality of life and ensure more efficient and sustainable maintenance and management of big cities. Even if their “formula” is still fresh and goes through constant evolution it has reached enough maturity to contrast with very developed discourses on networked cities in Asia (with New Songdo as showcase) and the recent fascination of North America for open data initiatives (some carrying a similar tone of naiveness of the first wave of “Muni WiFi” projects).

In his presentation “Barcelona Smart City” (slides), Joan Batlle highlights the articulation of the four major connected elements of their model:

• Ubiquitous infrastructures: city network, citizens’ access network (communicate and create information). Examples: Muni WiFi mesh network (680 nodes, 20 services, 500 free hotspots)
  Information: sensors, digital footprints, citizens’ information (raw material of the innovation factories). Examples: BitCarrier’s real-time traffic monitoring system, my visualizations of Bicing and Flickr data, aggregated mobile network traffic data. Joan rightfully questions “Can we use Directive 2006/24/EC to devolve citizens’ information to citizens? …and allow them to make services for the citizens (from the citizens)?”
  Living labs, open innovation: citizens, companies, universities, city council. Example: Urban labs at 22@ as testing space for innovative enterprises, Living labs with its Media-TIC building.
  Smart Services: municipal advanced services, services for citizens from citizens. Example: iBicing for iPhone, and the Urban Mediator, one “click” services.

It will certainly be interesting to participate in the integration and interplay of this kind of Networked City model (extended by other initiatives such as Citilab) within the urban planning history of “Modelo Barcelona” that shows how the city has overcome major contradictions. Barcelona has the opportunity to be a leading city in that domain, with a sensitivity for its citizens, civil society and networks (a legacy of Manuel Castells?) over the concrete and the forms. It contrasts with many other European cities such as Paris and its famous Greater Paris design competition and Christian de Portzamparc’s project on efficiency and speed featuring some sort of paleo-futuristic Monorail.

Why do I blog this: My presence in Barcelona is partially the fruit of the 22@ urban project, because I preferred to pursue a PhD within the living lab and messy aspect of Barcelona rather than the green alleys of traditional university campuses. In return, my research projects are now presented as ground for potential future of the city. This is utterly rewarding and of course it incites me in intensifying my investigation in Barcelona.

I consider cities as being “smart” by default (isn’t it the human’s greatest invention?), so I do not support the contemporary discourse that information technologies and infrastructures will make them any smarter, also considering that IQ tests for cities still need to be developed. However I do believe they can help, with the support of proper models and processes, in making a city an even better place to inhabit.