Zoekresultaten

It works! But now what? Upscaling smart city experiments

The bidding paradox

The ambition to host mega sports events is (or can be) perfectly justifiable with various arguments. The most persistently used argument is the supposed financial or direct economic gain for the host economy, of which the compelling body of evidence is discouraging. This implies that the justification for hosting should come from a different, broader economic angle. This paper provides a critical discussion of the myriad of economic and frequently intangible effects that could be put forward in the public debate preceding the submission of a bid. Paradoxically, most of these effects are not, or infrequently employed in public debates.

Production in peatlands

The majority of Dutch peatlands are drained and used intensively as grasslands for dairy farming. This delivers high productivity but causes severe damage to the provisioning of ecosystem services. Peatland rewetting is the best way to reverse the damage, but high water levels do not fit with intensive dairy production. Paludiculture, defined as crop production under wet conditions, provides viable land use alternatives, but these alternatives are rarely compared to conventional drainage-based systems. Here, we compare ecosystem services of six theoretical production systems on peatland following a gradient of low, medium, and high water levels. This includes conventional and organic drainage-based dairy farming, low-input grasslands for grazing and mowing, and high-input paludiculture systems with reed and Sphagnum cultivation. For each production system, a theoretical 1 ha unit was designed using data from literature. Four aspects of ecosystem services were quantified and monetized, including agricultural productivity, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, water storage, and biodiversity potential. Results show that drainage-based dairy farming systems only support high milk production without any of the other ecosystem services included, even with organic farming practices. Biomass producing paludiculture systems have high ecosystem services value, but do not lead to production values comparable to the present dairy farming. Capitalizing GHG reduction and other ecosystem services from peatland rewetting with carbon credits or other payment schemes would close this production and income gap. However, standard practice to monetize provision of ecosystem service is currently unavailable. Sustainable use of peatlands urges more fundamental changes in land and water management along with the financial and policy support required.

Telling the Bigger Video Story

Natalie Bookchin’s work is synonymous with the Video Vortex network and the rise of YouTube. Whereas we got to know each other’s work in the turbulent net.art late nineties years, this particular story started with a DVD I got from Natalie, containing The Trip (2008), a video collection of early YouTube fragments, which Natalie reassembled into an imaginary travel around the globe, shot during car trips on all continents. What has always defined Natalie Bookchin’s work is her ability to recreate unity out of dispersed fragments. We, as users, may feel lost and desperate, but the artist gives us hope again that we can overcome distraction and senseless multi-tasking by creating an all-together new meta narrative that is human—again. This is database cinema as you always imagined it, overcoming the isolation of the individualized voice-as-image while paying respect to the unique status that each of us has.

Interview with Max Haiven

Conducted for the 2019 Venice Bienale catalogue of the Romanian pavillion, in particular Canal Grande: The Capital Pool and the Associated Public of Dan Mihaltianu, curated by Cristian Nae. The work “functions at first sight as a wishing well. It establishes an autonomous art fund and invites the visitors to self-organize and to decide on the utilization of the capital raised during the exhibition via capitalpool.net, proposing an artistic formula for exercising direct democracy.”

New perspective on social cost-benefit analysis in health care and social welfare. A personalised integrated care approach

Health and social well-being depend on many contextual facets which are interdependent in a complex way and are all but limited to the field of cure and care. Publications of the World Health Organization and the Dutch Ministry of Health show that good health also depends on socioeconomic aspects such as stable living conditions and (pre-emptive) debt counselling. Inspired by these findings, many programs have been launched that aim for an integrated approach of health and social issues. Although these programs enjoy a lot of sympathy, the implementation proves to be difficult. Among many obstacles, more than once the financing of the program is a stumbling block. The hesitation to invest is prompted by the uncertainties of the benefits these programs aim at. These uncertainties relate to both size and distribution. The intended results are mostly long term and not always easy to monetize. Moreover, the benefits may distribute among other stakeholders than those who bore the costs of the program, the so-called ‘wrong pocket problem’. To overcome the hesitation to invest, a social cost-benefit analysis offers a remedy. Social Cost-Benefit Analysis (SCBA): A SCBA assesses the impact of an investment on society by estimating all relevant costs and revenues – both financial and non-financial – and their (re)distributions amongst stakeholders. From this perspective, this type of analysis is an important contribution to policy development. Publications of public planning and research agencies in the Netherlands underline the contribution of SCBA’s to policymaking in the field of public health and social welfare.