Apa Kata Prof. John Howkins Sekarang?

Name tag sebagai pembicara di #ASEANCC2017

ASEAN menyelenggarakan Creative Cities Forum & Exhibition di Manila, Filipina, pada tanggal 26-27 April ini. Bandung diundang sebagai pembicara di hari kedua sebagai salah satu kota di Asia Tenggara yang telah menjadi anggota Jejaring Kota Kreatif UNESCO (UNESCO Creative Cities Network/ UCCN), yaitu sebagai Kota Desain, sejak Desember 2015. Selain Bandung, kota yang telah masuk jejaring UCCN adalah Pekalongan (Kota Kriya & Seni Rakyat), Phuket (Kota Gastronomi), dan Singapura (Kota Desain). Suatu kehormatan untuk dapat mewakili Bandung di forum ini, terutama waktu tahu bahwa ada teman dari jejaring BCCF, SouthEast Asian Creative Cities Network (SEACCN), yang juga akan hadir. Lebih semangat lagi ketika mengetahui bahwa pembicara kunci untuk forum ini adalah Prof. John Howkins, yang pertama kali memunculkan istilah “Ekonomi Kreatif” sekitar 20 tahun lalu.

Prof. John Howkins membawakan materinya di #ASEANCC2017

Catatan berikut ini adalah beberapa hal dari materi yang disampaikan oleh Prof. John Howkins pada keynote speech-nya yang berjudul What, When and How? The Creative Economy in The Philippines.

  1. What? Dalam tahun-tahun belakangan ini, lebih dari 150 negara dan ribuan kota membuat komitmen tingkat tinggi terhadap ekonomi kreatif. Terjadi peningkatan luaran secara global dari 2,200 Milyar USD di tahun 2000 menjadi 4,600 Milyar USD di tahun 2016.
  2. What? Kreativitas memanfaatkan berbagai gagasan untuk menghasilkan gagasan-gagasan baru. Sifatnya individual, pribadi, subyektif, dan ekspresif. Ekonomi Kreatif adalah menghasilkan uang dari gagasan-gagasan (The Creative Economy is making money out of ideas).
  3. What? Di UK (DCMS), Industri Kreatif bernilai sebesar 89 Milyar GBP, atau berkontribusi hingga 5,2%. Ekonomi Kreatif (seluruh bisnis kreatif) bernilai 133 Milyar GBP, atau 8,1%. Di Amerika (BEA), industri kreatif terhitung sebesar 704 Milyar USD, atau 4,2% dari GDP.
  4. When? Sejak kapan fenomena menguangkan gagasan ini terjadi? Bisnis kreatif memiliki sejarah panjang. William Shakespeare, seorang pujangga Inggris, adalah seorang jutawan. Mengutip Daniel Defoe, seorang penulis dan pebisnis, “Menulis telah menjadi sebuah cabang dalam dunia komersil di Inggris yang sangat diperhitungkan” (1725).
  5. When? Apa istilah yang tepat untuk fenomena ini? Berbagai istilah telah diperkenalkan, seperti Information Economy di tahun 1962 oleh Fritz Machlup, kemudian Knowledge Economy oleh Peter Drucker (1969), Post-Industrial Society oleh Daniel Bell (1973), dan Digital Economy oleh Don Tapscott (1995). Selain itu, muncul pula istilah-istilah lain seperti entertainment economy, attention economy, wired economy, network economy, dan cultural economy. Namun sejak tahun 1990an hingga kini, lebih dikenal dengan istilah Creative Economy.

    Grafik pertumbuhan sub-sektor industri kreatif di UK tahun 2008-2014

  6. Apa yang terjadi di tahun 1990an? Kreativitas menjadi gerakan massal. Orang-orang kreatif jadi bersikap seperti pebisnis. Para pebisnis menjadi lebih kreatif. Konsumen menginginkan kebaruan, gaya, dan hiburan. Pemerintah Inggris mempromosikan kreativitas sebagai sumber kesejahteraan, mengoleksi data industri inti, meluncurkan paket kebijakan menyeluruh.
  7. Apa yang terjadi di tahun 1990an? Teknologi digital mengubah konten, jejaring, format, produksi, promosi, harga, dan distribusi.
  8. Kita sekarang berada di mana? Prof. Howkins mengutarakan tiga konsep terkait Ekonomi Kreatif yang belum berubah banyak sejak dahulu: (1) Setiap orang terlahir kreatif, (2) Kreativitas memerlukan kebebasan, (3) Kebebasan memerlukan pasar.
  9. (1) Setiap orang terlahir kreatif. Setiap orang terlahir dengan memiliki imajinasi, dan gairah untuk memanfaatkannya untuk kesenangan pribadi dan tujuan umum. “Menjadi kreatif adalah berlaku sewajarnya.”
  10. (2) Kreativitas memerlukan kebebasan. Kita menginginkan kebebasan dalam mengatur hubungan kita dengan gagasan-gagasan.
  11. (2) Kreativitas memerlukan kebebasan. Untuk berkata ya, berkata tidak, berekspresi, mengeksplorasi, mengungkap, mempertanyakan, mengikuti, menyadur, mengendalikan, menolak, memuntir, mempopulerkan, memproduksi, mengemas, menampilkan, membingkai, meminjam, menggandakan, mencuri, mengembangkan, meneliti, menguji, menguji lagi, mengetahui, berbagi, bertukar, membuat purwarupa, mempromosikan, menjual, membeli, … “Cari, Tiru, Gabung dan Pelajari.”

    Bagian 1 graphic note Howkins

  12. (3) Kebebasan memerlukan pasar. Dalam Ekonomi Kreatif, terdapat aset, industri, pasar, dan transaksi. Sektor-sektor inti adalah: seni, desain, entertainment, media, dan inovasi – selain juga makanan, penjaga pesisir (US) dan pertanian (Cina).
  13. Bekerja dalam Ekologi Kreatif. Kreativitas adalah hal yang sangat kompetitif: lebih kompetitif dari pekerjaan yang sifatnya berulang, selalu berupaya mencari kebaruan, “sebuah ekonomi kegagalan”? Terdapat risiko pribadi: kesepian dan ketakutan, karena proses kreatif bagi penciptanya biasanya dilakukan secara pribadi. Terdapat risiko bisnis: aset takbenda (ide, kekayaan intelektual), ketidak-pastian pasokan, permintaan dan nilai; dan pengusaha pemula (start-up) memiliki tingkat kegagalan yang sangat tinggi.
  14. Bekerja dalam Ekologi Kreatif. Kita semua menghadapi dua ‘hakim’: yang satu akan selalu mempertanyakan: apakah ini hal terbaik yang bisa kamu lakukan? Sementara yang satu lagi akan bertanya, mungkin karyamu ini cukup baik, tapi apakah ini yang dikehendaki pasar? Pertimbangannya adalah pada “suara pribadi dan kekuatan kelompok.”

    Bagian 2 graphic note Howkins

  15. Universality: Kepemimpinan Pemerintah. Pemerintah UK (1998) menyatakan bahwa kreativitas merupakan hal yang penting untuk: kepuasan pribadi, kesejahteraan sosial, kekayaan ekonomi. Adanya pernyataan ini berdampak pada meningkatnya rasa percaya diri para pelaku kreatif, politisi, orang tua dan generasi muda – yang makin menjadi yakin akan pilihan masing-masing pada bidang kreatifnya. Aksi: deklarasi tingkat tinggi bahwa ekonomi kreatif adalah sebuah sumber daya nasional untuk semua orang.
  16. Universality: Pendidikan. Mereka yang berpendidikan tinggi menjadi semakin memiliki keinginan bereksplorasi dan lebih ekspresif, dan ingin bekerja di bidang bisnis kreatif (pasokan) dan ingin membeli produk kreatif (permintaan). Terdapat generasi baru: angkatan kerja dengan kapasitas pengetahuan, 70% lapangan kerja baru kini mensyaratkan “kreativitas” (McKinsey). Aksi: memperpanjang durasi edukasi, menambah kampus-kampus spesialis. Mahasiswa kini harus makin dihadapkan pada berbagai permasalahan nyata.
  17. Universality: Pendidikan. “Para pembelajar muda” harus “didorong untuk berkreasi, untuk mau mengambil risiko” (Peraturan Edukasi Prasekolah). Aksi: membuat hal ini menjadi dasar pendidikan di pra-TK, setelah TK, dan sepanjang hidup (belajar secara terus-menerus).

    Bagian 3 graphic note Howkins

  18. Kebebasan: Belajar. Edukasi tidak sama dengan belajar. Edukasi merupakan hal yang diarahkan oleh negara, bersifat wajib, dan memiliki batasan umur. Belajar merupakan hal yang diarahkan oleh diri sendiri, bersifat sukarela, dan terus berlanjut. Belajar lebih penting dibandingkan edukasi. Mengacu dari Soedjatmoko mengenai Kapasitas Pembelajaran: infrastruktur SDM perlu diolah untuk mewujudkan masyarakat pembelajar. Aksi: membuka lebih banyak kesempatan belajar di luar sistem edukasi (UK Skillset).
  19. Pasar: Managing Talent. Keberhasilan memerlukan keterampilan khusus: kepemipinan (mengintegrasikan kreativitas dan bisnis), memaksimalkan gagasan baik, kontrak (cara menuliskan, cara menutup perjanjian), finansial (menyertakan aset takbenda dalam neraca), pemasaran (memanfaatkan media sosial), dan penjualan (hubungan konsumen). Aksi: kampus manajemen dan bisnis.
  20. Pasar: Copyright. Copyright adalah mata uang ekonomi kreatif. IP memungkinkan kita untuk memiliki dan mengendalikan aset kita. Tapi kita memerlukan keseimbangan antara kepemilikan dan akses. Aksi: mendirikan sebuah pusat konsultasi IP gratis dan sebuah simpul untuk Digital Copyright Exchange.

    Bagian 4 graphic note Howkins

  21. Pasar: Retail. Di seluruh hal ekonomi, penjualan sama pentingnya dengan pembuatan. Drucker: sebuah perusahaan memiliki hanya dua fungsi, inovasi dan penjualan. Penjualan dalam hal ini bertujuan: menghasilkan pendapatan, memungkinkan pengembangan bisnis, dan menyebar gagasan-gagasan baru. Aksi: ikuti pendapat Drucker, dan kebijakan yang mendukung distribusi dan penjualan.
  22. Empat kriteria untuk memulai aksi: Perubahan dan Keberagaman, dan Pembelajaran dan Adaptasi.
  23. “Masa depan tidak menunggu untuk ditemukan. Masa depan itu untuk diciptakan, terlebih dahulu dalam pemikiran, lalu dalam kegiatan.” Walt Disney.

Prof. Howkins dengan graphic note dari materi keynote speech

Beberapa hal yang tertangkap dalam graphic notes antara lain:

  • mengenai pentingnya bagi pemerintah untuk memiliki kepemimpinan dan cara berpikir yang berbeda (mau menanyakan, “apa yang bisa kami bantu? apa masalah yang kalian hadapi?” pada para pengusaha pemula), dan bahwa pemerintah seharusnya mendengarkan juga saran dari para pelaku dalam bidang desain dan media;
  • karya ekonomi kreatif merupakan hal yang subyektif, sehingga sulit untuk menjadikannya sebuah kebijakan yang memerlukan perhitungan-perhitungan kuantitatif;
  • mengenai cara meyakinkan pemerintah lokal: melalui demo/ pilot project yang tidak terlalu mewah, tapi dapat menjadi sebuah simpul yang dihargai baik oleh sektor bisnis maupun oleh komunitas;
  • bahwa kita makin hidup dalam dunia jejaring takbenda, di mana konsumen lebih memilih untuk bukan lagi membeli, melainkan memiliki benda, dan lebih menginginkan untuk mendapatkan akses ke sebuah pengalaman;
  • setiap negara perlu memiliki sekolah seni khusus (film, desain, dsb.).

Dan ada banyak hal lagi yang membuat bahasan mengenai ekonomi kreatif ini menjadi tak kunjung habis. Bagi yang masih penasaran, terutama yang berada di Bandung November 2017 ini, bisa berinteraksi langsung dengan Prof. John Howkins yang telah bersedia hadir di Bandung Design Biennale! Nantikan update selanjutnya ^_^

Prof. Howkins menutup presentasinya dengan kutipan dari Walt Disney, tokoh kreatif dunia

BIOMATERIAL TEKSTIL

Tetes Annisa Lestari (27116028)

Industri tekstil adalah salah satu penyumbang karbon terbesar di dunia. Produksi bahan pakaian membutuhkan banyak energi. Dalam global industri tekstil memproduksi sekitar 60 juta kilogram bahan pakaian dan bertanggung jawab atas besarnya emisi karbon yang dihasilkan dari beberapa proses seperti proses pewarnaan, bleaching, dan finishing. Bahan pakaian ini kebanyakan diproduksi dari bahan sintetik seperti nilon, polyester dan rayon. Bahan tersebut tidak hanya membutuhkan energi yang cukup besar saat diproduksi, namun juga bahan kimia yang digunakan pada saat proses produksi selalu berakhir sebagai limbah beracun yang mencemari udara, tanah dan air. Yang lebih mengejutkan adalah bahan pakaian dari serat alam seperti katun yang diproses dengan cara konvensional itu menggunakan pestisida, pupuk kimia dan penggunaan air yang banyak. Masalah lain adalah limbah kain yang dihasilkan dari sebelum dan sesudah diproduksi menjadi pakaian siap pakai. Limbah kain merupakan salah satu jenis limbah yang sulit diolah, karena merupakan limbah anorganik yang tidak mudah terurai sehingga tidak dapat dikompos. Industri tekstil adalah salah satu industri yang sangat besar, begitu pula polusi dan limbah yang dihasilkan setiap harinya.

Dengan latar belakang industri tekstil yang kurang ramah terhadap lingkungan karena penggunaan bahan kimia pada proses manufaktur dan proses-proses setelahnya sehingga menghasilkan karbon yang tidak terkontrol, maka kebutuhan pencarian beberapa biomaterial tekstil sebagai material alternatif dan bersifat biodegradable dalam dunia tekstil yang diharapkan ideal untuk segala aspek khususnya ramah terhadap lingkungan.

National Geography memuat artikel tentang material tekstil biodegradable. Young-A Lee seorang profesor dari Universitas Iowa, menciptakan rompi, sepatu dan tas dari limbah produksi teh fermentasi: kombucha. Material ini diciptakan dari campuran simbiotik dari ragi dan bakteri. Proses fermentasi dari kedua bahan itu akhirnya menumbuhkan selulosa bakteri dan dapat diproses menjadi pakaian siap pakai atau aksesori fashion. Ketika material ini kering sempurna, tekstur dan kelenturannya mirip dengan karakter kulit binatang. Tetapi kelebihan dari material ini adalah seratnya mudah terurai dengan cepat, tidak seperti katun organik atau serat alam lainnya. Setelah materialnya sudah tidak layak dipakai sebagai pakaian atau aksesori fashion, maka material tersebut dapat digunakan sebagai kompos.

pastedGraphic.png

(sumber: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/people-and-culture/food/the-plate/2016/05/turning-food-waste-into-a-fashion-statement/ diakses pada tanggal 12 Maret 2017)

Berikut beberapa contoh biomaterial lain yang telah dikembangkan untuk menjadi material alternatif yang lebih ramah lingkungan:

Istilah Muskin diambil dari ‘mushroom-skin’, 100% biodegradable kulit yang terbuat dari nabati diekstrak dari jamur dan proses pewarnaan menggunakan bahan bebas kimia, lembut, lentur, anti-air secara natural, dan tidak berbahaya ketika bersentuhan dengan kulit manusia, mudah untuk dibentuk (contohnya untuk diproduksi sebagai tas, sepatu dll), dan tes laboratorium menyatakan bahwa material ini higienis karena dapat membantu menghentikan perkembangan bakteri.

pastedGraphic_1.png

(sumber: http://www.ecouterre.com/muskin-a-vegan-leather-made-entirely-from-mushrooms/muskin-mushroom-leather-5/ diakses pada tanggal 12 Maret 2017)

XXLab dari Yogyakarta menciptakan biomaterial tekstil terbuat dari limbah produksi tahu. Proses pembuatannya dengan cara direbus dengan cuka, gula, diberi penyubur, ditambahkan bakteri, diendapkan selama 10 hari sampai membentuk selulosa mikrobia dan ditunggu sampai kering. Material dari limbah produksi tahu ini adalah biomaterial dengan biaya murah dengan zero waste.

pastedGraphic_2.png

(sumber: http://xxlab.honfablab.org, diakses pada tanggal 12 Maret 2017)

Semoga material-material biodegradable seperti telah dijabarkan diatas dapat menjadi salah satu alternatif dalam mengurangi emisi karbon dan limbah dari industri tekstil.

 

How to change education from the ground up

Here are some excerpts from a recent talk (published July 18, 2013) by Sir Ken Robinson. Wanting it or not, this speech made me think about our new, ridiculous national curriculum, composed by the government “up there”, untouched by the actors of education themselves: teachers and learners – and how we can actually change them from the ground level. Schools are not factories that print certificate to rank children’s “intelligence”; they should be a pleasant place where children maintain and discover their love for learning.

==========

The basics of education: science, technology and math, are necessary, but not sufficient.

The basics of public education, or why we invest in a system of mass public education, has the following purposes (not labeling, just as a reference, and not in particular order):

(1) Economic.

Education has powerful economic purposes. It does and it should. But the economic system of that day was industrialism, which is why the system looks the way it does. It is not that system anymore for us.

If we are to meet the “economic” requirement of education we need to have a system that promotes creativity and adaptability.

Adaptability: Organizations are not like machines, they are like organisms. They are living entities, made out of people, feelings, motivations, roles, aspirations, passions, and ambitions. And if the organism doesn’t respond to changes in its natural environment – just as in the natural world – it dies.

Creativity: We need companies that are consistently and systematically creative.

Students coming out of college find it difficult to come up with something new. That’s because they are educated on the standard routine of routine testing, multiple-choice tests.

(2) Cultural.

It’s a small enough planet as it is, but it has becoming more and more populated. But in any case, the ethical reasons as well as strategic ones, we formed education that enables people to understand how they came to think as they do, why their values are as they are, why their patterns of lives are as they are, and why other people are different. We need reformed education that helps people to understand their own cultural identity and what formed it and those of other people.

Now for that we need a broad education… the arts, the humanities, to social studies, not just to technical subjects.

(3) Social.

We need a form of education that engages this generation in the processes on which communities are organized and governed. And there are a lot of evidences on disengagements, that people are pulling away from those roles.

“Every generation has to discover its democracy” (on election)

It is very important that we take parts in these civil discourses. You don’t do that in education by giving people lessons on civics. You do it by having a culture which embodies these processes of participation, and great schools do that.

In the end, education is personal. It’s about people. It’s not about components or machines.

And if we know about people: they are different. They’re driven by different talents, different abilities, different passions, different interests and different motivations. One of the signature features of humanity is Diversity. Of course it contrasts sharply with one of the organizational principles of education, which is Conformity.

But if we don’t understand that education is about People and Individuals in all their diversity and multiplicity, then we keep making the mistakes that we make. If we’re treated as a machine… rather than a human process, then we’ll run ourselves into a cul-de-sac.

When we’re talking about changing education “from the ground up”, that’s the “ground” that I mean. Most political strategies start from the top-down: “if we can get people to conform, everything would improve”. And the evidence is quite the contrary: the more the government go in the “control” mode, the more they misunderstand the level of teaching and learning, the more they misunderstand the process of education.

So we have a situation here in the UK now, where most of the major teaching units have passed a vote of “no confidence” of the government’s education strategy. That shouldn’t promote a smug expression of satisfaction on the government. That should keep them awake all night, thinking, “How badly have we got this wrong?” You cannot improve education by alienating the profession that carries it out.

Recognizing that education can be encouraged from the top down is one thing. But it can really be improved from the ground up by the people who do the work. Because in the end it’s not ministers or states who’re teaching all of our children.

“The Empty Space” by Peter Brook: if you’re really concerned to make theater the most powerful experience that can be, we have to decide what we mean when we say “theater”. We have to get back to basics and focus on what is fundamental. And he answers that question in a brief passage in the book by performing a thought experiment. Essentially he says, “If you take a theater performance, what can you take away and still have it? What’s the core? What’s the irreducible minimum?”

You could take away the curtains, you could take away the script, the stage crew and the lighting, you can get rid of the director, definitely, you can get rid of the building. You don’t need any of that. The only thing you can’t get rid of, and still had “theater”, is an actor, in a space, and somebody watching.

Theater describes the relationship between the audience and a performance. That’s the relationship that we mean. So if we want to make theater the most powerful experience that can be, we have to focus on that relationship between the performer and the audience. And, he said, we should add nothing to it, unless it helps. And of course a lot of what we add to theater distracts the relationship and substitutes for it.

It is an exact analogy with education: the heart of education is a teacher and a learner. And we have, overtime, obfuscated that relationship with every type of distraction. We have testing regimes, testing companies, political ideologies, political purposes, subject loyalties, building codes, all of these timetables and schedules.

That’s why we can spend all day long discussing education and never mention teaching or learning. But if there’s no teaching or learning happening, there is no education going. So if we’re going to improve education, we have to improve that a bit. And everything else has to not getting in the way of it.

So the focus on teaching and learning to me is vital.

Now what we know about learners, about children, is that children are learning organisms. Children don’t need to be helped to learn, for the most part. They’re all born with a vast variation of appetite for learning.

You don’t teach your child to speak. Most kids get to learn to speak in the first year and a half or so in their life, but you don’t teach them. They just pick it up. You nudge them, you encourage them, but you don’t teach them to speak. We do teach them to write. That’s a different thing. Writing appeared much later in human evolution than speech.

But my point is: children have a vast appetite for learning. And it only starts to dissipate when we educate them. That’s to say, when we put them in buildings, designed for the purpose. And put them in charade ranks and start to force-feed them information in which they may or may not have interest.

But learning happens anyway, and with the new technology it’s happening more and more. If we really want education to be more effective, we have to focus on the process of teaching and learning. And teaching has become reduced, in the political discourse, to a kind of delivery system (“your job is to deliver the national curriculum”). Teaching has become a kind of delivery system and teachers have become a kind of functionaries in the administration of cash.

Actually, teaching is an art form. It’s not enough to be a good teacher to know your stuff, though you need to know it. But more than that, you need to excite people about the material. You need to engage them. You need to pick their imagination, to feel their creativity. You need to drive their passion for it. You need to get them to want to learn this. You need to find a point of entry. That’s the gift of a great teacher.

One of the ways that we improve education is by recognizing it happens at the point of where teachers and learners meet. If it doesn’t happen there, it doesn’t happen at all, in formal, organized education systems.

So you can’t improve education by ignoring that relationship, or demeaning it. But it also means, if you are in that relationship, you hold the tools of powers right in your hands. You can change the system yourself. You don’t need to wait for anybody to do it.

A school, just like a child, or a teacher, is not a component. They are living organisms. Living, breathing entities. A school is a community or reciprocating individuals who develop their own culture, their own way of seeing things, their own habits and rituals, and so on.

There isn’t a single point of influence. The teachers in the system, the head teachers, are just as influential in their own world as the policy makers. If you are a teacher, if you are a school principle, if you’re a superintendent, if you run a school district, so far as the kids are concerned who go to your school, you are the education system.

If you began to change your practice, if you began to change the environment of the school, if you – in other words – concentrate on your   in the school as a part of the larger climate, eventually you start to affect the whole. That’s how our social movements happen.

Human culture is essentially unpredictable. But it accumulates over the creative activities of individuals feeding off each other. That’s how organic growth happens.

When I said that revolution is needed, and it should start from the ground up, it’s already happening. The system is already adapting. The part of the system that is not adapting is the high level of government policy.

The real role of leaders, when it comes to education: whether you are a teacher, or head teacher, or head of a district – your proper role, if you have a loving relationship with education – is not to try to command and control it, but to recognize your place in climate control. And if you can help to change the climate of expectation in education, if you can change what’s happening at the ground, then you’ve changed the world.

 

==========

Related posts in this blog:

Passion, Creativity, Element, Energy

Imagination, Creativity, Innovation

Handmade Urbanism

In the first week of June, 2013, BCCF was invited to participate in an exhibition and symposium with the theme Smart Cities: The Next Generation at Aedes Network Campus Berlin, Germany. We were asked three questions that determine the “smart” aspects of our city for the exhibition materials:

  1. How does your project “smarten up” your city?
  2. Why does your city need your project and what challenges are country­‐specific to your urban context?
  3. What are the new behaviors your building/planning/initiative encourages?

While working on the answers, we became more convinced that the strength of Bandung is in its proactive citizens who have been interfering with their own habitat, to make it more livable. Our presentation in Berlin included a series of Kampung Kreatif (Creative Kampong/Neighborhood) program and Helarfest 2012, which brought up issues concerning four elements of the city: river, forest, kampong and park. Next to Bandung, there are also other Indonesian cities such as Jakarta and Medan participating in the event. During the event, it was evident that most growing, dense cities in developing countries are facing similar problems due to overpopulation and underdeveloped infrastructures and facilities, of which solutions mostly depend on the survival ability of the inhabitants.

Handmade Urbanism

Handmade Urbanism book and Urban Future CD

On our last day in Berlin, we found a book whose contents resonate what has been done in the local neighborhoods of Bandung. This book, titled Handmade Urbanism, describes the journeys of five world cities that have brought them to receive the Deutsche Bank Award for their civic initiatives: Mumbai, Sâo Paulo, Mexico City, Istanbul, and Cape Town. The book also comes with a CD, titled Urban Future, containing documentary videos of these cities. Each city has its own issues, which received different treatments as well, and they are not always expensive, nor requiring a substantial amount of budgeting and infrastructures. From the stories, we could learn that all things started small – but they got started anyway – whether from a group of people or an individual, from common villagers or planners/architects to public figures, with different backgrounds.

The examples in Handmade Urbanism show results after about 10 years of the interventions, when citizens could already enjoy the results, where social changes are evident and physical improvements are obvious. Kampung Kreatif program in Bandung started in 2012, now not even 1 year old, and – as experienced in all fields – getting started and maintaining the energy and spirit are the most challenging phase. There is still a long way to go, but we are convinced that we can also keep the program going and reach up to such benefits!

=====

“All over the world, water takes a significant part of a city” – Mumbai

“The problem (of a city) will never be solved if we keep trying to demolish the slum” – Mumbai

“Community-based programs take place and succeed where administration fails” – Mumbai

=====

“City growth as desired by politicians creates greater tensions among its citizens” – Sâo Paulo

“Small gestures (planting, library, mural, etc.) can help create space and connectedness” – Sâo Paulo

More positive activities > more life security > less crime > less reason to demolish the “slum” – Sâo Paulo

=====

“Small scale activities and movements can create great changes in a community” – Mexico City

Next to soccer games, gangs also organize graffiti classes, which have lowered the criminal rates – Mexico City

“A change of an urban space can change the attitudes and activities of the local people” – Mexico City

“Improving accessibility for all (citizens) means improving the quality of life” – Mexico City

“A city is more than a place to make money, people need more than roofs above their heads” – Mexico City

=====

“Teach children to tend a garden, they’ll go home and teach their parents” – Cape Town

“Municipality needs to recognize what has been done at the grass root level, the activism and pro-activeness” – Cape Town

On Technology Transfer

The other day I asked @OutofPoverty, who was welcoming questions via Twitter, the following:

Based on your experiences, what factors caused failure in technology transfer?

@OutofPoverty answered:

1)   Technology that is too expensive

2)   Failure to design for the market

3)   Absence of last mile supply chain

4)   No attention to business principle

OutofPoverty

The reason I asked this had to do with a lot of design projects by our industrial design students, both within an academic scope and extra-curricular programs, and also numerous research, experiments and projects by our industrial design research group, especially the ones that take place in rural or remote areas. In those areas, essential needs and problems are obvious; however, the answer is not always “design” as in a “tangible product”, but sometimes it’s the infrastructure that hinders access, unaffordable materials, or substandard resources. Designers often have to think beyond the tangible product, by creating also a system that supports the availability and delivery of the product. With it, comes the aspect of technology transfer, as well.

Theoretically, the concepts of “appropriate technology” and factors that guarantee its sustainability once it is implemented are familiar to us, but still, not all technology transfer works for every case. Therefore, I wonder what others in a similar line of works have experienced.

The answer confirmed that there should always be a realistic economic calculation for any solution, next to other crucial factors such as usability and access. Thanks, Paul Polak & team! 🙂

Science, Technology, Society – 2

Some pointers I noted from the first session of “The Role of Science, Technology and Arts in Predicting Social Phenomena” seminar, held by the Research Group for Humanity Studies (Faculty of Arts and Design), Institute of Technology Bandung on July 11th, 2012.

 

Forensic Linguistic

From the speech of Prof.Dr. Aminudin Aziz about the role of forensic linguistic in predicting and analyzing social-political phenomena in Indonesia:

A linguist is different from a polygot. A polygot has multi-language ability, a linguist has the ability to analyze languages without having to be able to speak many languages.

Analysis tools

A part of a forensic job is to place someone’s origin based on his/her name and speech intonation, to find a language’s data, to investigate whether a statement is actually made by a certain person.

How? Language has a regular structure. The speaker is consistent in his/her speech.

Patterns

Asian language structure has a circular pattern; the speakers tend to go around and around on a subject before coming right to the point. Anglo-Saxon has a linear pattern; the speakers straightforwardly state their minds. The Arabic language has a parallel pattern; the speakers present one important fact after another, so all these important facts come in a bulk to the audience/ listener.

 

From the speech of Roby Muhamad, MSc, MA, PhD:

Do we need Science to explain social phenomena?

If a scientist talks about social phenomena, he would likely get responds such as, “I knew that already”, or even “You went to school for that?”

This is because social phenomena can be responded by common sense.

Intuition is good to make sense, to give meanings, but not to understand the world.

Intuition is sometimes wrong, since it’s very specific, acquired from experience that is different from one person to another.

Social phenomena are unpredictable. The most possible thing is to predict the probability. It’s a matter of relevance, so the trick is to predict what is relevant.

It’s a matter of relevance

Internet untuk ilmu sosial adalah seperti teleskop untuk fisika, atau mikroskop untuk biologi. Untuk pertama kali dalam sejarah manusia, interaksi, perilaku dan sikan manusia terekam dalam jumlah besar di Internet.

Kemampuan belajar dan beradaptasi dengan cepat

lebih penting daripada mengantisipasi masa depan

 

Lots more interested things to be captured, but – as goes the saying – you’ve got to be there to absorb every detail 🙂

A happiness thermometer

Science, Technology, Society – 1

Some pointers I noted from the first session of “The Role of Science, Technology and Arts in Predicting Social Phenomena” seminar, held by the Research Group for Humanity Studies (Faculty of Arts and Design), Institute of Technology Bandung on July 11th, 2012.

From the opening speech by ITB Vice Rector for Academic Affairs and Student Affairs:

The Circle

There is a connection between cellular phones, motorbike-taxi, and the logging of Gunung Kidul forest.  Forest farmers cut down more trees of the forest, even the younger ones, to be able to afford cellular phones and motorbikes. These farmers, who used to use the motorbike-taxi service to get home, are now able to call their sons, who now now have their own motorbikes, to pick them up. The motorbike-taxi service gradually disappeared, and so did the trees, and – following – so did these farmers’ jobs, due to the diminishing woods to harvest. Considering this circle, it is obvious that (the desire for) technology influences social conditions.

The biggest challenges  faced by (American) scientists of today are health, material science and sustainable energy.

So far, engineers have been considering only the output of the technology: function, effectiveness,  and all other tangible and quantifiable results. They rarely consider the intangible result: the impact to society.

From the speech of Ir. Ary Mochtar Pedju, M.Arch:

Technologically excluded regions

Developed countries have science and technology-based economy. Developing countries will never cross the line that borders between industry-based economy and technology-based economy.

Technologically-excluded regions are within a poverty trap. These regions are prone to infectious disease, low productivity and environmental degradation.

Referring to MIT, the traditionally-segregated disciplines: Basic Science & Engineering/Technology and Humanities & Social Sciences, are merging and forming a new group called Science Technology Society, which solves complex, real societal needs/ problems.

We need reformed education.

Science Technology Society

Universities should have inter-disciplinary centers/ labs/ programs that drive the faculties (and then the hierarchic structure), and not the other way around.

An inter-disciplinary “center” should not be a mere physical office(!).  It should be a gate for all local wisdom, a hub for interaction for Government, Business and Academic entities, and should facilitate interdisciplinary projects.

We should examine the cultural & institutional context in which science and technology are rooted.

We need to write history books with broad-based analysis that include the use of technology and how it influence our society in all aspects: economy, politics, etc.

From the discussion session:

There should be a revolution to our middle-school education: eliminate the divisions of Science and Social majors.

Mother tongue: Indonesian?

The Indonesian language is, for most Indonesians, a second language, since it is common for Indonesians to speak a region’s language as their mother tongue. As the impact, Indonesians become non-critical to Indonesian language. Therefore, the term “Speaking Indonesian language properly and correctly” should be replaced with “Speaking Indonesian language appropriately and according to context”.