We make up the rules as we go along? Projectification, ‘smart’ cities, and the spectres of emergence
cytuj
pobierz pliki
RIS BIB ENDNOTEChoose format
RIS BIB ENDNOTEWe make up the rules as we go along? Projektyzacja, ‘bystre’ miasta i widma emergencji
Publication date: 19.11.2018
Culture Management, 2018, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp. 233 - 256
https://doi.org/10.4467/20843976ZK.18.016.9470Authors
We make up the rules as we go along? Projektyzacja, ‘bystre’ miasta i widma emergencji
We make up the rules as we go along? Projectification, ‘smart’ cities, and the spectres of emergence
Abstract
The paper discusses the issues of the so-called projectification of reality from the perspective of the praxis philosophy. This point of view triggers the reflection upon the profound transformations of social reality resulting from the proliferation of “projects” as methods of operation and organizational forms. However, due to such transformations, it is necessary to move on from the deliberations inaugurated predominantly based on management sciences to a more humanistic (philosophical) reflection and the associated ontological issues. As a consequence, a “project” is understood not only as an educational method, a method of (e.g. creative) work in general, or an organizational form (e.g. in business) but, above all, as a property of social reality. Due to the projectification processes of the modern world, such fundamental variables of our functioning in reality in general as time, space, and social relations are evolving. This approach, proposed by Anders Fogh Jensen, for instance, records the fundamental transformation of modern disciplinary societies into contemporary project societies. Nevertheless, it prompts the following query in a critical plan: What are the consequences of this process? What is the post-project reality like? What are the effects of such temporary activities: flexible tools for the transformation of the world, emergent interventions into social reality? These questions are raised in relation to a specific case: the Oasis Little India project implemented in the historical Indian district of Singapore. This case perfectly fits into one of the most “projectified” ideologies of urban development—the notion of smart city.
[b.a.] (2016), IESE Cities in Motion Index 2016, [dok. elektr.], dostęp online: https://www.iese.edu/research/pdfs/ST-0396-E.pdf [odczyt: 1 maja 2018].
„Indians – Minority Rights Group”, [strona www], dostęp online: http://minorityrights.org/minorities/indians-3 [odczyt: 1 maja 2017].
„Smart Nation Singapore”, [strona www], dostęp online: https://www.smartnation.sg/about/Smart-Nation [odczyt: 1 maja 2018].
Bourdieu P. (2007), Szkic teorii praktyki poprzedzony trzema studiami na temat etnologii Kabylów, tłum. W. Kroker, Kęty: Marek Drewiecki.
Brown T. (2009), Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation, New York: Harper Business.
Chodkowska-Miszczuk J., Wylon M. (2017), Fenomen Singapuru – perspektywa geopolityczna, „Przegląd Geopolityczny”, tom 22, 9–32.
Cohen B. (2015), The 3 Generations of Smart Cities, „Fast Company”, [dok. elektr.], dostęp online: http://www.fastcoexist.com/3047795/the-3-generations-of-smart-cities [odczyt: 1 maja 2017].
Collings E. (1923), An Experiment with a Project Curriculum, [dok. elektr.], dostęp online: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015051331133;view=1up;seq=14 [odczyt: 1 maja 2017].
di Bella A. (2015), Smart Urbanism and Digital Activism in Southern Italy, [w:] C. Nunes Silva (ed.), Emerging Issues, Challenges and Opportunities in Urban E-planning, Pennsylvania: Engineering Science Reference, IGI Global, Hershey, 114–140.
Foucault M. (2010), Bezpieczeństwo, terytorium, populacja, tłum. M. Herer, Warszawa: PWN.
Foucault M. (2011), Narodziny biopolityki, tłum. M. Herer, Warszawa: PWN.
Fred M. (2015), Projectification of Swedish Municipalities. A Case of Porous Organizations, „Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration”, Vol. 19, No. 2, 49–68.
Hodgson D., Cicmil S. (2008), The Other Side of Projects: The Case for Critical Project Studies, „International Journal of Managing Projects in Business”, Vol. 1, Issue 1, [dok. elektr.], 142–152, dostęp online: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/16734 [odczyt: 1 maja 2018].
Jałocha B. (2017), Projektariusze i projektokraci. Wpływ procesów projektyzacji na warunki pracy w projektach, [w:] P. Cabała, M. Tyrańska (red.), Zarządzanie organizacjami w społeczeństwie informacyjnym. Innowacje, projekty, proces, Warszawa: Instytut Organizacji i Zarządzania w Przemyśle „ORGMASZ”, 102–110.
Jensen A. (2012), The Project Society, Aarhus: Unipress.
Jensen A., Thuesen Ch., Geraldi J. (2016), The Projectification of Everything. Projects as Human Condition, „Management Journal”, Vol. 47, Issue 3, 21–34.
Kilpatrick H.W. (1929), The Project Method. The Use of the Purposeful Act in the Educative Process, New York: Columbia University Press.
Knoll M. (1996), Faking a Dissertation: Ellsworth Collings, William H. Kilpatrick, and the ‘Project Curriculum’, „Journal of Curriculum Studies”, Vol. 28, Issue 2, 193–222.
Kwek I. (2017), Whose Future in “The Future of Us”?, [referat wygłoszony podczas 5th International Visual Methods Conference: Visualising the City w Singapurze].
Latour B., Hermant E. (2006), Paris: Invisible City, tłum. L. Carey-Libbrecht, [dok. elektr.], dostęp online: http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/downloads/viii_paris-city-gb.pdf [odczyt: 1 maja 2018].
Midler Ch. (1995), Projectification of the Firm: The Renault Case, „Scandinavian Journal of Management”, Vol. 11, Issue 4, 363–375.
Packendorff J., Lindgren M. (2014), Projectification and Its Consequences: Narrow and Broad Conceptualisations, „SAJEMS”, Vol. 17, No. 1, 7–21.
Prawelska-Skrzypek G., Jałocha B. (2014), Projektyzacja sektora publicznego w Polsce – implikacje dla organizacji samorządu terytorialnego, „Zarządzanie Publiczne”, nr 3(27), 273–284.
Schatzki T.R. (1996), Social Practices. A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schatzki T.R. (2001), Introduction: Practice Theory, [w:] T.R. Schatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, E. von Savigny (ed.), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, London–New York: Routledge, 10–23.
Schatzki T.R. (2002), The Site of the Social. A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Schütz A. (2008), O wielości światów. Szkice z socjologii fenomenologicznej, tłum. B. Jabłońska, Kraków: Nomos.
Skórzyńska A. (2017), Praxis i miasto. Ćwiczenia z kulturowych badań angażujących, Warszawa: IBL PAN.
Szreder K. (2016), ABC projektariatu. O nędzy projektowego życia, Warszawa: Bęc Zmiana.
Wittgenstein L. (1958), Philosophical Investigations, Anscombe G.E.M. (trans.), Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
Wittgenstein L. (1972), Dociekania filozoficzne, tłum. B. Wolniewicz, Warszawa: PWN.
Wittgenstein L. (2014), O pewności, tłum. B. Chwedeńczuk, Warszawa: Altheia.
Zaporowski A. (1996), Wittgenstein a kultura, Poznań: Wyd. Fundacji Humaniora.
Information: Culture Management, 2018, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp. 233 - 256
Article type: Original article
Titles:
We make up the rules as we go along? Projektyzacja, ‘bystre’ miasta i widma emergencji
We make up the rules as we go along? Projectification, ‘smart’ cities, and the spectres of emergence
Institute of Cultural Studies, Adam Mickiewicz University, Szamarzewskiego 89A, 60-568 Poznań
Published at: 19.11.2018
Article status: Open
Licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Percentage share of authors:
Article corrections:
-Publication languages:
PolishView count: 1310
Number of downloads: 1193