Amy Novogratz

TED Prize Director, TED Conferences

This conversation is closed.

If you could make a wish on behalf of The City 2.0, what would it be?

Today, TED announces the winner of the 2012 TED Prize: the City 2.0. The City 2.0 is the city of the future ... a future in which more than 10 billion people on planet Earth must somehow live sustainably, together. The City 2.0 is not a sterile utopian dream, but a real-world upgrade tapping into humanity's collective wisdom. The City 2.0 promotes innovation, education, culture and economic opportunity. The City 2.0 reduces the carbon footprint of its occupants and eases the environmental pressure on the world's rural areas. The City 2.0 is a place of beauty, wonder, excitement, inclusion, diversity, life. The City 2.0 is the city that works.

A range of visionaries around the world will be advocates on behalf of the City 2.0. We are listening to them -- and to you.

What is your wish for The City 2.0? A wish capable of igniting a massive collaborative project among the members of the global TED community, and indeed all who care about our planet's future.

Share it below.

  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Dec 6 2011: The goals of the Venus Project are admirable and inspiring.

      Unfortunately, the actual ideas it proposes fall flat on the ground, and its very approach to solving the problems of our civilization violates the most important principle of viable transformation: solutions to complex, interdependent problems can not be imposed by a grand design, but must evolve in a competitive, creative environment where new ideas can be tested, failed, re-engineered and re-launched quickly.

      Venus project thinking is also utterly blind to the most important phenomena of our times - the exponential growth of knowledge and technology. Its obsession with the removal of obsolescence is entirely self-defeating.

      Lastly, the Venus Project utterly ignores everything we are learning about human nature from the sciences of evolutionary and social psychology as well as behavioral economics and ethics.

      Perhaps the Venus Project can be a great foundation for a StarTrek-like TV series about the future where humanity has transcended its limitation, but it is no more than a fantasy.

      That said, anyone who has a couple of hours of free time will enjoy exploring the Venus Project as a fun intellectual exercise in critical thinking.
      • thumb
        Dec 6 2011: Michael: Agreed that the Venus Project’s “grand design” approach is overly ambitious. On the other hand, isn’t there a place for urban planning? Haven’t some examples of cooperative community organization been successful? I mean, think of cities which you might enjoy living in. Haven’t government based initiatives played an important role in making those cities appealing?

        So where/how do we draw the line between centralized planning and distributed decision making?

        EDIT:

        So what exactly is "City 2.0"? Is it anything like Web 2.0? That is, all hype and no substance?

        Anyone got any links?
        • thumb
          Dec 6 2011: This is not an conflict of urban planning vs. ad-hock development...

          Rather: how can the goals of urban planning be achieved through evolutionary design methods -- light on ideology and heavy on experimentation and feedback -- what might be called "scientific governance."

          Having a vision (think Steve Job's OSX / iOS ecosystem) helps, but it is evolved over time with market feedback -- and occasional surprises.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: Tim, check out my response above, but I believe that TED is discussing, as Michael is pointing out, that CITY 2.0 is not a zero-base, start-from-scratch-masterplanned city as much as a "real-world upgrade."

          Simply put, as shiny and clean as Venus Project's ideas are, they are more futurist than real-world. $100,000 won't go a long way to buy his magnetic rail systems and polymer houses.

          TED is looking for what massive impacts we and our collective innovations can do right now. I lay some of that out above.
        • Dec 8 2011: Tim, Michael, Grant--

          You asked for a link so i thought i'd share! I did a project a while ago for the Living Building Challenge that did precisely this...where we tried to imagine a world where distributed decision-making was the norm and where the broad stroke efforts at sustainability and collective community didn't completely mask the individual's expression (which a lot of master planning inadvertantly does). I posted earlier but it feels like this thread has become more about proselytizing and "the venus project" than it is about throwing ideas around. I don't claim to have all the answers but i will claim to have worked my tail off trying to arrive at a visual presentation that describes precisely what you've referred to (the winter image comes the closest). I hope you take a look, read a bit, and enjoy! I won't be insulted if it's nothing more than a few hours of critical thinking :) All the better!

          Kevin

          http://www.rollerhaus.com/reclaiming-natures-metropolis-a-living-building-language/

          (team credits are listed on the main site)
      • thumb
        Dec 6 2011: I really think that the venus project is a possible way of living with some changes. It is a great vision of what can be, and I think that in some countries, they have adopted a little of that style of living. It really brings forth a closer community and convenience. It could be a lifestyle for some people I think and I also like the option of having what we got as well.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: To Michael Vladstone:

          "what might be called "scientific governance." "

          You have just arrived at the very underpinning tenet of The Venus Project.

          As someone who has applied some critical thinking to TVP I notice that most of the points you raise seem to be based on a misunderstanding of what the Venus Project is about.

          For eg. the anti obsolescence point assumes that products would not develop however TVP merely advocates that innovation should be freed from corporate ties allowing it to develop exponentially which I believe was exactly what you are calling for.

          So perhaps the critical analysis will take more than 'a couple of hours' ;)
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: Mercury Boy - Your comment comes closest to nailing it, and I really appreciate that you focused our attention on a key issue. What is utterly broken in the USA and many other countries is the political system, not the economic system (i.e. capitalism). Corrupted elections and bureaucracies are effectively run by bribery of special interests - from corporations down to teachers unions. The "revolving door" system makes it possible for supposedly "public servants" to go in and out of private sector, collecting time-shifted compensation from corporations - another form of bribery. Finally, mostly utterly ignorant, uneducated population votes for candidates they feel comfortable having a beer with, rather than carefully considering their character and qualifications.

          The TVP will be up against the same challenges in order to make the transition - it assumes a very large group of highly educated individuals to run the proposed system. The problem is, there is no pathway proposed to get from here to there: first, it is impossible to vote TVP in because it is counter intuitive to at least 80% of the population, and even if it had George Clooney as the winning candidate, it would suffer the same fate as the Obama administration - gradual dilution of principles and ideas under the pressure to compromise with the status quo, sliding back into corruption and inefficiency.

          Competition works because no single group ever has the complete answer. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon and FaceBook are transforming global business and culture in a hugely positive direction precisely thanks to ruthless competition and responses to each other's successes and failures.

          There is another comment elsewhere about TVP emerging in time of global meltdown crisis. I will answer it there
      • thumb
        Dec 7 2011: I believe evolution is a constant trial and error process, the "strongest survive."

        I also believe that we have the capabilities for trials, with the errors being at no cost of lives. Granted, IF, that is the common goal of man one day. Which is not near in site.

        However if the aim/goal/ambition/path is to make the world run on reusable energy, Eco-friendly, equal for all, unified, whatever... V.P project has already pieced together a lot of details, considerations, and designs for those altruistic goals.

        It's really sci fi when you think about it, because everyone would ultimately have to reject the mass educations of civilization, then sacrifice, in order for the future. The immediate transaction from here to V.P is indeed ridiculous.

        I think therefore I am - > mass mimetic-education involved in multiculturalism - > we think therefore we are

        Jacque Fresco is just a bright guy with a good idea, I am sure he wouldn't care if you named the idea "take a dump in your hand and throw it on the ground for soil." He, I and many TEDsters would enjoy this goal. Instead of nay saying and then saying "..anyone who has a couple of hours of free time will enjoy exploring the Venus Project as a fun intellectual exercise in critical thinking."

        How about critical thinking the details that are in the way of making now to something LIKE-V.P Instead of dictating what is wrong with something that is a little bit more complex than 2000 characters.

        Point A - It does ignore modern cognitive sciences data, BUT it is also a really old idea. I posted it myself because it has surpasses just science, it's another artists desire of the future, which maybe science fiction in practical implications, but so was flying vehicles, which we have, "airplanes."

        Point B - A good REAL education would provide means for the anticipation and nature to question new information. Also the anti-nature of "self" to become "individual anarchist."

        A lot of Star Trek stuff, is today, factual.
      • Dec 7 2011: Michael I'm afraid you have misunderstood or not have done thorough research on the ideas proposed by The Venus Project.
        First of all you are confusing the overarching concepts with the city, transportation etc. designs themselves. The former are those that are important and the latter will be constantly updated. It's not a static societal model that's being proposed, but an emergent one. TVP designs will have to be tested and improved continuously as new methods, materials etc. are found.
        As far as your claim regarding competitive environment being the most important principle for viable transformation, I would have to disagree. There are two types of competition in regards to species. Intraspecific and interspecific competition. Biologists tell us that species with extensive intraspecific competition have either become extinct or are under extinction. I would suggest looking at cooperation within the species if you want to achieve long term sustainability.

        You mention:
        "Venus project thinking is also utterly blind to the most important phenomena of our times - the exponential growth of knowledge and technology. Its obsession with the removal of obsolescence is entirely self-defeating."
        I have not seen any signs of that at all. On the contrary as I mentioned above, TVP mentions about how science and technology are racing forward but human values have stayed behind and haven't kept up. The intrinsic and planned obsolescence of the market system is a reality and leads to enormous waste of resources, having profit as the underlying principle.
        Technological obsolescence which occurs due to advancements, is dealt with modular design methods that embrace change.

        Lastly, in terms of human nature and human behaviour, I suggest you to watch the following video presenting research on behavioral science:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K91ITIrXdqk&feature=related

        I don't see how this is going against the things TVP talks about. On the contrary it supports its claims.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: OK... Where to begin addressing the mountain of ignorance and inexperience...?

          You are able to have this argument with me on a computer that did not cost you a fortune and is super easy to use thanks to the ruthless, profit-motivated competition between Apple, Microsoft and Google. That competition (and cooperation of engineers within these corporations) also gave birth to the iPhone, the iPad and now the Kindle Fire - at $200 a pop!

          "Cooperation" and "philanthropy" delivered the cute green turd of a laptop known as the OLPC. But where is OLPC 2.0 - the tablet?

          It was a noble cause, but now it appears to have been entirely unnecessary. The private, competitive IT industry will deliver less and less expensive, reliable, high-performance tablets to the entire world in the next few years that any peasant will be able to figure out how to use. In hindsight, I'm embarrassed that I supported that approach when it was presented and promoted at TED. Yes, OLPCs served well the kids who got them and it brought tears to my eyes to see it happen, however, in the bigger picture, where we need to serve billions of children, it was nothing but an irrelevant blip. OLPC engineers might have contributed more to humanity by working at "greedy" Apple, Google or Amazon.


          Dealing with "technological obsolescence through modular design methods that embrace change"... ? ARE YOU KIDDING US?

          How do you "modularize" your way from a MacBookPro to an iPhone or an iPad?
          From oil-extraction based economy to a bio-solar?

          Exponential growth of technology is necessarily destructive in that it ruthlessly obsoletes older technologies and products. Now, planning for closed-loop recycling is an entirely different issue - again solved by profit motivated industries hungry for raw materials.

          Best advice - watch the entire TED archive (as I did, more than once) and then try to compare, contrast and learn. Exactly the exercise in critical thinking previously suggested. :)
        • Dec 8 2011: yes profit is what makes technology evolve, but its not the monetary profit, its the profit of having better and easier life..
          humans probably had to use money in the past, but its not the case anymore, there is nothing anyone can say to convince me otherwise, as someone who got burned waaaaaay too much from capitalism i can see a much better world without money, and its not a dream, its a choice that people have to make..
          money is false, money is a lie, money is just a paper or a number that means debt to someone..
          money is the way to take resource from the poor and give it to the rich, it is a weapon for mass slavery and for controlling people's life, nothing more than that..
          it doesnt make our world spin, its not the material needed to make houses, roads, cars and food, the opposite is true, it is the material that makes most of the people in the world to not be able to get these things.
          and if you ask me its a crime to make a system that there are people who cant get the things they need for living, like the monetary system is.

          in a fully sustainable city there is no need for money or purchasing power in any form..
          there is only the need to educate everyone so they can live with the system in peace.

          people wont need to own cars, or other stuff (like homes), they will be able get it where they need it and when they need it, they will be able to be reasonable with other people cause they wont have a monetary incentive to F#$K each other.
          people will care for other people, cause they dont have to take money from them by doing something the other guy wont like, no more robberies, no more murders, no more stealing, no more crime..

          this is city 2.
          anything else that use the current system (capitalism and democracy(lie)) is city 1.001
      • thumb
        Dec 7 2011: Looks and sounds like you have a vested interest in dissing the venus project Michael. You are part of the Integrity Capitalism Network?? I don't know too much about it to be honest, but it sounds like you are a capitalist, do you honestly think capitalism works?? It Certainly does for a lot of rich people, but the needy in society [1billiion+] deserve a better system than capitalism. It has failed as a social experiment and we need a new updated system that has no vested interests.

        The Venus Project is against the monetary system which creates endless amounts of suffering. Our values need to come up to par with our technology, at the moment we have the tail wagging the dog...
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: EVERY LIVING BEING HAS A VESTED INTEREST - including you.

          I an not "dissing the Venus Project" but actually encouraging people to learn and think more about it -- both its noble goals and its hopelessly childish solutions. The value of the Venus Project is the conversation it has started.

          Capitalism and the monetary system have already succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of its inventors, and are the key reasons we actually have 7 billion living on this planet. Despite the many shortcomings of its present implementation, capitalism works and is resilient. in fact, TED is built on, and is sponsored 100% by the fruits of capitalism.

          However, at present capitalism works like MS-DOS in the world that deserves an iOS -- it must and will evolve. WIthout breakthroughs in IT it was impossible to institute pervasive transparency that would keep individuals from violating integrity - as they do under any other system. To make capitalism work better and overcome its shortcomings (periodic cycles of boom and bust driven by fraud and speculation) we must embrace complexity. Integrity Capitalism Network is one possible systemic solution to address the key shortcomings of capitalism as we experience it today.

          Talk of "values" is noting but hot air - human nature will not change until much further in the future when we start tinkering with our own DNA. However, today we can change human behavior by making sure that every time businessmen promise one thing and then deliberately do another to rip off consumers or damage the environment, they wind up paying a price orders of magnitude greater than what they stood to gain through their transgressions.

          To bring this conversation back to the intended themes - City 2.0 -- radical transparency made possible through IT and legislative solutions, in my opinion, will be the key enabling component for the growth of sustainable, equitable and prosperous cities of the future that we have an opportunity to invent and evolve today.
        • Dec 7 2011: Hi there Michael. Please don't feel attacked but what you say about the venus project shows perfectly that you don't know much about it and that you didn't loose any time trying to. Try to understand what they wish to achieve, how and their goals and proposals in general. please,at least before speaking and not agreeing with it learn about it, then if you still don't agree, fine. at least then you can be sure you don't agree even after you understood it and you can even send them your sugestions and let them know why you think it won't work and why. Maybe they find your ideas logical and interesting and might help them get ideas to change something either in technical parts or their goals... They are open to sugestions and feedback I can assure you but without being well informed about it maybe better to just say you don't know enough about it to have an opinion on it. Cheers.
        • thumb
          Dec 8 2011: I was actually absolutely captivated by TVP when I first discovered it in 2008 and spent over 40 hours learning about since then, downloading and reading all of their published literature, watching presentations and videos of meeting, etc. The more I learned the more disappointing it became - none of TVP's core concepts could stand up to rigorous evaluation. However, I have not looked at it in almost a year and should take a fresh look....
        • thumb
          Dec 8 2011: Ed, I don't have a particularly strong opinion of the Venus project one way or another, but one remark I feel deserves some clarification. Desire is the cause of suffering....not money. Even if the monetary system were removed, I'm afraid it would simply be replaced by another troublesome factor that would perpetuate this problem for humanity.
      • Dec 7 2011: Unfortunately your derogatory labels seem to serve no purpose to support your arguments.
        It's ironic that you suggest to watch the archives of TED talks.
        Have you watched Clay Shirky's talks? Daniel Pink's talk?
        Have you researched on the work of Alfie Kohn?
        They talk about the exact opposite things that you talk about.
        Have a look at Linux, Wikipedia and open source software and hardware and then come and talk about the profit motive.

        In terms of modularization check the software industry for some good examples and the Open Source Ecology for a hardware one:
        http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_Ecologies

        You are confusing the deliberate obsolescence from industry (intrinsic, planned and perceived) and and the obsolescence due to technological advancements. These are two entirely different things.
        The ignorant person that writes this post, suggests you to spend 50 minutes of your time and watch this documentary devoted to planned obsolescence:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1xt4nEvipg

        I'm really sorry my friend that you are locked into the market doctrine box and deny to see the evidence that supports something other than your closely held beliefs.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: This is drifting way off the subject of the question, so I'll try to bring it back.

          1) Don't watch TEDTalks to agree with everything being presented, but to educate yourself about a broad spectrum of perspectives on very complex issues - an important feature for City 2.0 might be educating its citizens to embrace complexity. (Yes, I spent quite some time on all the luminaries you mentioned.)

          2) Linux and Wikipedia are driven 100% by the profit motive of individuals who contribute to these endeavors. Where did you get the idea that profit is only defined by cash? For example, when I choose to invest time in debating you on the TED site I PROFIT by expanding my own understanding of complex subjects by motivating the expression of diverse opinions. Embracing a broader definition and inventing new ways of quantifying PROFIT might be a great feature for the City 2.0 initiative.

          3) Planned obsolescence is either hidden product fraud , or the product of ignorance of consumers who purchase it. Both will be solved by radical transparency and collaborative consumption, and have nothing to do with capitalism. These will be essential for City 2.0
          Thank you for the link to the documentary - downloading it now.

          4) You got me backwards from reality - I educated myself over many years and abandoned many closely held beliefs, instead looking at complex and often contradictory evidence.
          Unfortunately, the more you learn the fewer "friends" you keep: I often find myself hated by the socialists and the Ayn Rand libertarians alike because I expose both of their naive oversimplifications of capitalism's shortcomings and strengths.
      • Dec 7 2011: Michael Vlastone, I am a Venus Project fan and I must notice that you have few misunderstandings regarding The Venus Project.

        1. TVP would not impose it's 'Grand design', leaving no place for competitive involvement of people interested in contributing to human society. One can say that if established, TVP would offer just the opposite of inert 'Grand design', i.e. it would open possibilities which are held back today by monetary system - which does not encourage advancement of human society (nor human condition in any sense) at all - which is inadmissible, considering our state of technology and science.
        ‘Competitive, creative environment’ which you advocate is, unfortunately, mostly a form of uncivilized struggle for survival in our monetary system.
        2. Venus Project is not ‘blind to development of technology’, it is an absurd statement from any point of view. ‘Removal of obsolescence’ that you mentioned is true regarding planned obsolescence which is consequence of monetary system and significant source of pollution.
        3. Statements about ‘human nature’ are very bold and, fortunately, utterly unfounded. Such statements can not be put in same sentence with ‘scientific’. Since ‘human nature’ talk is pretty much in domain of philosophy, we could argue that evolution teaches us that every living organism is adapting to surrounding condition, and sociocultural evolution is continuous process, which can, and should, be constructively altered by responsible individuals, unlike it is being done to this day. Presently, sociocultural evolution is being altered in favor of monetary system, i.e. it’s champion - free enterprise system.

        The Venus Project should not be looked at as a pass time, as you suggest. It is rather a proposal of global use of reason. In contemporary state of human society, such a serious attempt to introduce plain healthy human reason to our affairs should be looked upon with gratitude and genuine curiosity.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: Milos, I started out as a fan too....

          Let me offer you a different perspective. I used to be really frustrated by video games - what a waste of time and computing resources. Then I understood that the obsession with all these stupid games drives the evolution of CPUs, GPUs, etc. THose who spend too much time playing Warcraft, would have wasted their time anyway by sitting at the bar and drinking 20 years ago. Instead, their consumption drives an industry essential to all human progress.

          If everyone was born smart, kind and beautiful life would be fair - but it is not, at least not right now. Think about that one in the context of Venus Project.
      • Dec 7 2011: It seems while the followers of the Venus Project do well in repeating the phrases and promises of the Venus Project, they don't understand its doctrine in its entirety. Neither does Vlastone.

        There is a very important conclusion upon which much of VP's doctrine is built. The conclusion is that a sociocybernated scenario is INEVITABLE for society. Why? Because it is the most efficient economic arrangement conceivable at this time. As the market tends to inevitably push for greater efficiency, it places society on an inexorable path toward a particular organization. This organization will be more controlled than the organization we have today. This process of reorganization is not only caused ultimately by economic forces but forces of social evolution as well. This is THE MARCH OF EVENTS that is made inevitable by the deep structure of technological and sociological co-evolution. This reorganization will be a reaction to the civil unrest generated by a growing world population running short on resources, overloading the carrying capacity of the earth. At this point you can expect top-down control programs descending upon the populations from desperate governments.

        Free markets can't operate in a world that has become too desperate to permit the exercise of past freedoms. Governments will have to install a planned and controlled sociocybernated system by necessity. They will call upon scientists/technicians to engineer this program. There would be no other way of managing societies under such desperate conditions. Solutions for the crisis from the market would be too slow.

        In sum, such an inevitable organization manifests in two ways: 1. something like a technocratic fascist tyranny or a technocratic state controlled military dictatorship, or 2. if forward thinking people work together with large investors (on the scale of Dubai), then we can shortcut to the new organization before governments are forced to take coercive action. Fresco tries for the latter.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: Just to add to the 'planned obsolescence' aspect of this discussion.

          Isn't planned obsolescence a consequence of 'economies of scale' - In the current paradigm products have to be mass produced in order to achieve economic viability. With the burgeoning 3D printing technologies this will be turned on it's head where bespoke production with minimal waste will be possible.

          This type of 'access abundance' is something I would like to see implemented in City 2.0 especially where food is concerned which is certainly an area covered by the Venus Project by hydroponic farming methods.

          Check out Cybernated Farming Systems, a new venture by ex-shuttle engineer (and TVP supporter) Douglas Malette who aims to get this technology off the ground commercially.

          I guess what all this is pointing to is the goal of 'Self sustaining' which surely no-one is arguing against.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: The thing about the future is that very few things are inevitable. Religious cults all have their beliefs in their particular "march of events that is made inevitable." Lenin, Hitler, Mao and Bin Laden all believed in their inevitable march of events. All were wrong, of course, but that hasn't weakened the confidence of the many who still maintain their own vision of an "inevitable" future. The past is inevitable. The future is flexible and uncertain. Inevitably uncertain.
      • thumb
        Dec 7 2011: Appreciate the voice of reason, hard to hear in a sea of frothy dreams.
        • Dec 8 2011: Regarding your response above. Indeed, extrapolating the future is difficult. Some have succeeded in that past. Some haven't. The key is recognizing basic axioms and patterns and understanding how they affect each other.
          -We recognize that humans have a set of absolute needs
          -If you recognize that humans have certain needs, you can delineate a range of reactions when these needs go unfulfilled.
          -We can see one reaction in the world today, that citizens will uprise when their needs go unfulfilled
          -Likewise, you can recognize that self-preservation is virtually a law of life, and that this holds true for institutions as well, beings individual self-preservation is dependent upon the institution. Self-preservation is a primary cause for uprisings.
          -You can recognize that in the past, uprising people were eventually pacified when economic conditions returned to a comfort zone. But can such a return continue?
          -You can recognize that the population growth rate cannot be sustained.
          -You can recognize that the earth has finite resources
          -You can recognize, that automation is a relentless trend in human evolution. B/c it is more efficient, humans will automate wherever possible, as soon as possible

          What lays ahead is quite obvious. It is a threat that no good reason or good prudence could deny. (To think that the market can solve it requires as much faith as you may accuse me of having). We are barreling forward toward a crisis: technological unemployment for an exponentially growing population. That is the end of capitalism and the beginning of something new. How will institutions deal with this? The answer: Sociocyberneering in a global resource-based economy. It will be the most efficient way to administer human needs. Society is a mechanism and someday it will be managed like a mechanism.
        • Dec 8 2011: The point is that a sociocybernated resource-based economy is as inevitable to our era as automation was inevitable to the medieval era. It is as inevitable as the human body merging with technology. It will evolve as naturally as a bee hive. Economic forces, human need, and planetary constrictions will force it into place.

          Natural law is responsible for this evolution. The bee hive was forced into existence by natural law; so too will it force new infrastructures in cities and social arrangements.

          However, there is a point of no return, and there are factors that may interfere with this evolution (natural disaster or nuclear war).

          Of course technology is the most radical variable and is rendering the future of material objects and their function ever more unpredictable. In contrast, the relationship between humans and technology has evolved in a relatively stable and predictable way. Our technology has changed, and its change is difficult to predict, but our relationship to it has not changed. Fresco's extrapolations are concerned with this relationship and operate on its basis. Fresco is concerned with the larger issue of human evolution of which technology is a part. Such extrapolations require a focus on certain factors that many forcasters severely neglect. Some say it is inevitable that humans will merge with machines, but that is as far as they go. They don't concern themselves with what is inevitable for society.
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: Not really, The designs in "flat land" are just an example of how the best technology applied could work. It's more a way of building cities than a unique design, you can learn more about it in the website. However if we keep efficiency and sustaniability as our goal. We need to move forward and forget our current market based structure. That will make a real City 2.0
      • Dec 8 2011: If not a full scale TVP style RBE, what say you about what I consider the transitional and ongoing alternative of self managed communities?

        In any case, I think a lot of people look to find flaws in order to say, "Look, it can never be that great.. just won't happen in reality." Well, finding flaws is a good thing because it allows for improvement- the attitude that this is "Utopian"- when in fact there will always be problems of some sort- and therefore must never even be attempted, is not as helpful. I also agree with Sharon who is saying that suggesting the Venus Project doesn't mean that one agrees with every proposal by Jacque, but rather, the overall picture of what it allows for.
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: We are working on a platform that could essentially handle what you are saying as well as keep things local. I am drafting a more complete response and would appreciate your thoughts.

        http://nolewalkingshaw.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/city-2-0/

        http://prezi.com/tdozumz2s8a3/ynslc-prezi/
    • thumb
      Dec 6 2011: If one embraces the idea or a vision, it does not mean you have to agree 100%. Take the best things and change some stuff... for now. If great ideas are rejected because it is new, innovative and astounding, we push ourselves backwards. We need to have an open mind because there is a lot of good things in the venus project.
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: Sharon, urban history is littered with wonderful ideas of utopianists. The Venus Project shares so many similarities with these it is not funny. Whilst many goals are noble, creative, innovative, we need to recognise the reality of our villages, towns and cities, and that the way forward is thousands of small projects to change the way cities and towns work.80% of the future is already here. We are better off supporting ways to improve the existing, than to chase one perfect city, in one cultural context that may not translate across cultures and climate zones.
        • thumb
          Dec 8 2011: @ Peter. Points well taken. There are so many ways to interpreted TVP. I did not say that we copy TVP exactly but taking some great ideas from it and apply to what we have missed here in the US. As I said before there life is a balance. At present, we have moved too far towards greed and mis-management or what ever the reasons may be that contributed to where we stand today. Why are there so many homeless here? I can name you countries like Singapore that there are no homeless people walking the streets. Everyone is taken care of by the family or the Gov. When companies are rich, they give to the poor and actually help create homes for the homeless and sickly and managed the community. No one tells them what to do. They just do it. I think Singapore has kind of adopted the TVP a little. People actually do not need cars. Public transportation is really easy to get to. As the country get richer, I hope the act of civic conscience is still maintained.

          Back to us, maybe a selected, more contained, well-run community could be a solution for us. Because a closer well designed cell community can bring more advantage than a spread out community where no one cares about each other. TVP project seems like a possible solution.
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: Sharon,

        Singapore and TVP share urban/social ideas, which are universal. Singapore has not adopted TVP at all. They are learning from European best practice sustainability. Having worked in Singapore, and with Singaporean urbanists, I am aware of what they are doing, how they are going about it, and who is the inspiration. In many projects, ideas bubble out of local people and are adopted.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: The Venus Project
    Every action and decision we take (or don’t) ripples into the future...and for the first time we have the capability, the technology, and the knowledge to direct those ripples.
    www.thevenusproject.com
    The Venus Project Goals
    1.Realizing the declaration of the world's resources as being the common heritage of all people.
    2.Transcending the artificial boundaries that currently and arbitrarily separate people.
    3.Replacing money-based nationalistic economies with a resource-based world economy.
    4.Assisting in stabilizing the world’s population through education and voluntary birth control.
    5.Reclaiming and restoring the natural environment to the best of our ability.
    6.Redesigning cities, transportation systems, agricultural industries, and industrial plants so that they are energy- efficient, clean, and able conveniently to serve the needs of all people.
    7.Gradually outgrowing corporate entities and governments (local, national, or supra-national) as means of social management.
    8.Sharing and applying new technologies for the benefit of all nations.
    9.Developing and using clean, renewable energy sources.
    10.Manufacturing the highest-quality products for the benefit of the world’s people.
    11.Requiring environmental-impact studies prior to construction of any mega-projects.
    12.Encouraging the widest range of creativity and incentive toward constructive endeavour.
    13.Outgrowing nationalism, bigotry, and prejudice through education.
    14.Eliminating elitism—technical or otherwise.
    15.Arriving at methodologies by careful research rather than random opinions.
    16.Enhancing communication in schools so that our language is relevant to the physical conditions of the world.
    17.Providing not only the necessities of life, but also offering challenges that stimulate the mind while emphasizing individuality rather than uniformity.
    18.Finally, preparing people intellectually and emotionally for the changes and challenges that lie ahead.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: The Venus Project all the way on ths one, over 70 years of research into this, and using all current technology it is a realistic goal. Lets make ithappen.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: I wish that the City 2.0 took "social networks" back to the physical world. The city of the future should be a community of communities. Neighbors should know each other - and interact with one another. Residents of cities who share interests and other common traits should be able to easily find one another - and get to know one another. Technology can obviously play a key role in making this happen, but at the end of the day cities should be about the people who live in them and the interactions that they have together.
    • thumb
      Dec 7 2011: Ariel, this is absolutely necessary. We have run social networks all over the world. It is time to land social networks where they belong, affecting one's local, physical world for good by accessing the global information network.

      I think that City 2.0 should be "open source."
    • thumb
      Dec 7 2011: That could be done because the way the City 2.0, it is a closer network of living conditions where you will interact with people.
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: A good claim, Ariel. In order to do that, the city 2.0 needs public spaces open to everyone and intelligently designed to favour self-organized networking. An agora with designated moderators where the public can inform and deliberate amongst themselves for the improvement of their community.
      It also needs providing an infrastructure to facilitate the participation of someone who has an 8 hour shift behind him (which is one of the merits of virtualia). This would not only be valuable to establish a true-to-its-name local democracy but also to harvest the intrinsic unused ressources of the citizens for the citizens
    • Dec 8 2011: Indeed. A Resource Based Economy proposes to automate as many of the menial, repetitive jobs as soon as possible. This will provide abundance of what is needed and shorten work days giving people more free time to socialize, learn new things, be creative, and have work that is more fulfilling to our lives and the lives of everyone else who participates in the system.

      In our current monetary based sytsem, automation displaces people from work and they become unemployed. Without a job for income, citizens lack access to resources which is really what people need anyway. Not some 9-5 that we hate, pays us poorly, and stresses us out.

      With integrated transport systems, youtube "Ultra transport" and "ET3 transport" meeting people halfway around the world in real time will be almost as easy as on the internet. If you give people what they need to survive and the time to enjoy it people will behave very differently as they did in preagricultural days where societies were based on community, sharing, and abundance. Not scarcity and property where one is always stressed out and not able to trust people in a dog eat dog world.
  • Dec 7 2011: / English is not my main language guys, so there may be some small grammatical errors /

    An idea for a city is completely blank without being aware for whom the city is. You cannot build zoo cages for zebras without having grass, water, etc. In other words, you analyze the subject first.
    An understanding of human necessities and human behavior is crucial for starting such a project. Therefore, the known subject must be related to it´s known environment (rates of change, technology, etc).

    This is how scientists work when they plan to colonize Mars or another planet. They start with the subject (the animal in our case), analyze the environment, and arrive at a solution for building the colony (how many resources Mars have, what they can use and for how long, the materials they can substitute, the consumption of a human being, etc).

    The Venus Project (http://www.thevenusproject.com/) is a model (design) for such a society. The designs by Jacque Fresco (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco) are built using the scientific method and taking into account the human behavior, present technology, planet resources, the emergent society, etc. Is a very detailed project with little regard for what people feel about it, just like any scientific approach should be. If you want a society for human concern you need to work hard on it to arrive at such solution and be aware of the constant changes that may occur on the way.

    The strange fact is that you (the listener) have very little time to analyze it (job, family, projects, old values) therefore you won´t be able to understand it. Remember, is a society analyzed and improved for more than 70 years, do not think you will understand it completely from a website, or a youtube clip.
    If you are serious you will do a research on it since is in your own good.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: Hi,
    I'm a french guy (so, sorry for my english) and I purprose The Venus Project.

    Why ?
    "The City 2.0 is not a sterile utopian dream"
    The Venus Project (TVP) was developped during 70years of scientific research. It's not a little kidness in more but a really way with science application.

    "The City 2.0 promotes innovation"
    Innovation is one of the major stuff of TVP who use the last innovation in technology, science, social,...

    "(...)education"
    Éducation is an obligation. Without éducation, we can't learn to live together in a sustainable future.

    "(...)culture"
    The balance between culture need to be conserved but only if it's efficient for a peacefully life between humans: http://tinyurl.com/cjdygor

    "(...)economic opportuniy"
    TVP's focus is to create a Ressource Based on Economy without monetary system: http://tinyurl.com/d3lxlrr

    "The City 2.0 is a place of beauty, wonder, excitement, inclusion, diversity, life."
    Architecture in different TVP city design are wonderfull. It's a fusion between ecology and technology with an intelligent management. I invite you, dear TED members, to watch this 3D Demonstration (from 23s): http://tinyurl.com/ck928hc

    With TVP, you'll join hundreds of thousands people who support the project and a big community who developing and updating the concept.
    Fusion beween TED & TVP for seeing emerge TVP's aims and proposal will be fabulous.

    Take Care,
    S.B.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: A City 2.0 concept should be in sync with upcoming Civilization 4.0 (where 1.0=Aboriginal; 2.0=Barter; 3.0=Monetary; 4.0=Resource-based).

    A Resource-based Economy is the proposed evolutionary alternative to the current monetary system, where efficient and sustainable cities take the front seat. We should at least be aware of the Resource-based Economy concept and take it into consideration in our collective effort to reach the City 2.0 vision.

    There is already a TED talk on the subject: An Introduction to a Resource-Based Economy [ TEDx - Peter Joseph ] ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI ). I've also put together a few talks and documentaries that are on topic or related ( http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5DD2281A0ECA17C3&feature=mh_lolz ).

    In a few paragraphs, the concept refers to the economic structure that is applied on top of nature/physical laws. The currently used economic structure worldwide is the monetary model, which in turn, current political perspectives and corporations stand on. Our monetary economic model has reached it's peak for the current population and technological progress; it is not scalable anymore on a limited resource planet.

    A Resource-based Economy is an economic structure in which physical laws and the population's needs are taken into account first. We couldn't implement such a system before, as we require current day technical knowledge and infrastructure to deal with global resource inventorying, management and optimal path finding. It should be understood that money is a value proxy that doesn't take resource renewability and human requirements into consideration, which may lead to a social and economical collapse in a few decades if we continue pushing it.

    Regarding a smooth transition, I have found the following article to be informative and concise: Possible requirements for the transition to an RBE ( http://blog.thezeitgeistmovement.com/blog/icavot/possible-requirements-transition-rbe ).
  • thumb
    Dec 11 2011: The Venus Project city concept & design is not only outstanding but it provides for a comprehensive approach to solving most of the problems of the world through the scientific method within a Resource Based economy System.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: I would definitely vote for the Venus Project and Jacque Fresco's circular city arrangement as for the City 2.0 Ted's prize. His innovative approach in designing cities goes beyond anything established and constructed even in projects so far. On their website, you can find not only visual models and possible designs of cities that can be built on land, offshore and on sea, but also a media showing the real prototypes of future houses. Besides, the Venus Project is a tangible project, located in Venus, Florida, USA. You can visit the research centre that was built by Jacque together with his colleague Roxanne Meadows.
    More than that, Jacque's circular city is a part of many global cities around the world that could comprise new green technologies, safe transportation, production and distribution centres, modern hospitals, nice parks, comfortable homes, cultural and amusements centres.
    I believe that Jacque's unique project he worked on nearly all his life deserves a very close attention.
  • Dec 7 2011: Definitely The Venus Project.

    Though, it is easy to be overcome by the fanciful drawings; keep in mind those are just possibilities. It's the priority of values that is most vital; Embracing natural systems, maximizing efficiency, encouraging resource abundance, not scarcity. Those are the attributes of City 2.0 and what will bring about Kaku's Type 1 civilization.

    As to critics & detractors seen below, understand you're missing the forest from the trees. Nitpicking on relatively minor points or interpretations diffuses the possibility of starling towards any such advances a resource abundance will bring. You may think you're helping by being critical, but really, without an alternative solution to propose, you're just prolonging the harmful structures that exist and increasing the time to realizing City 2.0.

    To say, we could argue all day long on the finer aspects, but this is not the forum for it. The Venus Project is the beginning of Kaku's Type 1 civilization... so can we not agree it best to solve the other minutiae along the way towards resource abundance, to give our values the chance to evolve organically?

    Be critical, fine, but only as a part of the solution; anyone can poke holes in anything, doesn't mean the effort is justified.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: I nominate anyone who would talk about the Venus Project. Jacque Fresco (creator of the project) will blow your mind if you watch him talk about the problems of the world.

    http://www.thevenusproject.com/

    V.P should be considered, as V.P is an already existing structure towards similar ideas being strive for by Earth 2.0
  • Comment deleted

  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: I'm afraid that people start shooting thousands of ideas, they may all be good ideas, but what I wish is to find a way of integrate all those ideas, no dominant side, no short vision. We need a wide view of the challenge in order to understand, integrate and synthesize; there is no room for "one size fits all" we need a strategy for highly contextualized solutions, empowering local development while been open and connected.
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb

        Peter R

        • +1
        Dec 8 2011: No this does not do what Victor is suggesting
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: With all the respect Mr. Fresco deserves for a life time dedication, I don't think Venus Project is realistic enough, there are many good ideas, but I don't see them feasible to apply as urgently as we need to change things in the world, for sure are useful and inspiring, but again, whatever City 2.0 ends up been must be economically, socially and environmentally sustainable, highly contextualized, open solutions, ready to apply ASAP.
        • Dec 12 2011: just cause you don't see them feasible does not mean they aren't. Testing Jacque's theories will prove if its feasible or not, PAL!
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: Victor, your point is spot on. The hot spots for innovation are not the big cities, but the smaller innovative cities and towns, even villages. They have lead the way, and we need to see what they have done, how that can be applied in our context, and how we can improve on it. The city of tomorrow is already 80% built - they are our existing villages, towns and cities. It these that we have to improve. We don't need to build a new city. I believe City 2.0 is the journey of transformation of our existing cities, and it is the way that we enable this. Hence my suggestion that I have put forward here. We need to create a new global dialogue between all the local places, so that each can help each other, as well as learn from each other. Also perhaps we can hope that this may bring many of the spiritual or social wishes presented here. The solution to your local problem may actually not be in your area, but the person holding it could be half a planet away, and unless there is someway to draw people together, and connect local places there is so much we have to lose.
    • thumb

      Peter R

      • +2
      Dec 8 2011: Victor, I agree that the City 2.0 prize approach to the future of the city needs to be a globally integrative approach of the thousands of ideas that are already on the ground making a difference already. Like both a physical and virtual library of alexandria, collaboratively built in every city around the world by local partners and volunteers, linked by the virtual. That way, each city's contextualised solutions can be examined and adapted by other cities. This is not a high-brow C40 approach, but a grass roots approach.
  • Dec 6 2011: Building a city is not just about architecture and civil engineering. There's more to cties than buildings, roads, sewers and parks. A city is a collection of people and what makes a city worth living in is the staggering array of connections between all of those people. But the worst thing about city life is how shallow and empty most of those connections are.

    Having grown up in the countryside and moved to the centre of a city, the thing I miss most (even if I didn't truly appreciate it at the time) is the sense of community that you feel when you live in a small town. There is a tremendous warmth and comfort in sharing your life with the people who surround you.

    Building connections has another great advantage. TED is a prime example of what can be achieved by simply sharing your ideas with the world. It doesn't need to be a groundbreaking scientific discovery, even simple things like learning to tie your shoelaces properly can have a dramatic effect on the way you live your life. When we teach we feel valued and when we learn we feel inspired and when we share we feel a part of something amazing.

    Now, imagine a world where everyone is both teacher and student, sharing their skills and experiences with anyone who wants to learn. Imagine a building on every street or every city block which is dedicated to the sharing of ideas. A place for everyone with no limits on age or background. Whether you're a retired carpenter that wants to pass on his skills to a new generation, a widow who wants to share her perspective on life after the death of a loved one or a schoolchild who wants to scream at the world for not doing enough about climate change; the world will be enriched if you share what you know.

    My ideal city would always have a place where you can do that, freely and openly and for everyone to benefit.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: ...that humanity's impact on the natural environment will be part of required curriculum for students K-12. It all starts with knowledge!
  • Dec 16 2011: I was once in conversation with the chief of urban planning in Uppsala, Sweden and he pointed out that many of the choices that he and his colleagues made were still heavily influenced by key choices that had been made 400 years earlier. So... one thing I would wish for is that when designing the city living spaces of the future that dreams and visions are imagined with a very long time horizon. Wondering... who will we be as human beings in 500 or a 1000 years time? And then designing with that mystery in the mix.

    Also... central to the visioning... I wonder... what are the dreams and visions for cities that are founded on eternal human needs and desires? For instance the human need & desires to have a voice, to be heard, to have dignity, to love, to be loved, to see the stars, to play, to experience joy, to be touched by the natural world.... and so many more. What is it that is eternal that can be made inherent in the design of cities.

    Also... to question... what's impossible for us to do today... but would be desirable if it was possible... (I mean in 100 years time it probably will be!) One thing that comes to my mind... what if children in a city could directly experience the full wonder and glory of the night sky from the heart of a city? Crazy idea... but if it was possible... I think it would be transformational. Imagine being able to lie on the grass of a city park and see the stars like you do from a remote mountain top. ;-)
  • Dec 11 2011: zeitgeistmovingforward.com ,watch the video, a resource based economy makes all monetary based economy obsolete
  • thumb
    Dec 11 2011: Teams all over the world experiment already with these ideas.
    Key concepts seems to be: collaboration and other fundamental perceptions of the world.
    Need to change they way we educate our children. This should be our topmost priority.
    It is also on our hands to create a model of society as proposed by people on the Venus Project, helped by companies like Google(Information management), and HP(CenSe net) and Cisco(communications).
    People need to wake up and take the next level in civilisation.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: I think the Venus project (TVP) is not suppose (or should not) to be a project that dominates every inch of the world. That would be a disaster. Animals need to be in their natural environments and respected. Change happens over time and acceptance. I see TVP as an alternate way of lifestyle for our future community to work, innovate, and live better with positive attitudes to improve, learn and grow. For us being a smarter race and more advances in thinking would help the people make the world a better place. Because we need to always push the boundaries, of innovation for advancement.

    We must understand that we cannot take away the CHOICES from people. For choices is our means of freedom as humans. So if people want to live as is… it perfectly ok. TVP project is a means for advancement for human enrichment. With TVP it opens so much possibilities to do such great things.
  • Dec 6 2011: Electronic infrastructure for organizations, cities, people to come together to share the good things that are happening, or even to share resources. So many people and organizations are doing great things (like TED), but there isn't a central hub for things like non-profits to go and share what they are doing and ask questions of other organizations that are similar in other communities across the world. We just need central locations for connecting all of these networks.

    Or cities to go and learn from others in once place with examples from across the world.

    or even business being able to connect more directly with non-profits and school to help out or even donate more of what they are currently throwing away .

    Everyone is always trying to re-invent the wheel, when there is already soo many good things out there, and so much collaborative power waiting to be harnessed and connected!
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: Katie, I agree that the City 2.0 prize approach to the future of the city needs to be a globally integrative approach of the thousands of ideas that are already on the ground making a difference already.

      It could be both a physical presence and a virtual presence, like a modern urban library of alexandria, collaboratively built in every city around the world by local partners and volunteers, linked by the virtual. That way, each city's contextualised solutions can be examined and adapted by other cities. This is not a high-brow C40 approach, but a grass roots approach so that anyone can log on, and see the solutions, and how they work. If they want, they can go and visit the local branch, and see some of the solutions in practice. They can also be referred to the real live demonstration projects that are pioneering the way, such as Hammarby Sjostad in my city, or BO-01 in Malmo, or Kronsberg in Hannover.

      we don't need to reinvent the wheel when there is so much good work on the ground.
  • Dec 14 2011: I wish for city 2.0 to be a place where more people can work and collaborate , for less hours a week. I wish for the city's habitats to be able to actualy enjoy all the great things this city has to offer, and contribute time to pursue with the city's community goals.
    • thumb
      Dec 14 2011: I agree whole heartily! Social networks give us unprecedented opportunity for collaboration, synergy, and interdependence. Now it is a matter of us as a whole managing those social resources in a way that our efforts are beneficial for the whole human family.

      Ultimately allocation of resources is the human families most limiting factor, not natural resources, or time, or wealth. Until people are willing to distribute their resources according to the situations with the greatest needs, we will only be addressing symptoms of the problem.

      Until we are ready for that, here is a video that talks about the need for consider collaboration as a good start.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XQIxr4gRQM&feature=share
  • Dec 14 2011: Such great ideas! To build on Jennifer Appel's green roofs, when I am flying into Los Angeles (LAX) viewing down at the sea of heat reflecting roofs, I've been longing to see them green, reducing energy demands, reducing the urban heat island, aiding natural filtration for our watersheds, creating more bird habitats and biodiversity. My TED City 2.0 wish would be to focus the green roof effort in the approaches to airports where they can be seen to help seed and spread the idea, and to foster a sense of community for these sometimes neglected neighborhoods.

    In response to Daniel's post below, I share your thoughts about City 2.0 building upon our existing cities. I have to disagree about the monorail though - what better way to appreciate and not adversely affect our existing cities while commuting on a monorail, which could give great vistas (I'm picturing riding along the river in Paris), connect the community, and actually be fun! Here are some of the advantages I agree with.
    http://www.seattlemonorail.org/advantages.html

    That leads me to my last thought about City 2.0 - it should be fun. It should take risks and experiment on social levels as well as with building systems, energy solutions, and agriculture. We have some serious challenges facing us in the future and we need to encourage some creative thinking. Let's start experimenting with ideas on the lawn of city hall and other public spaces at the invitation of our public officials, and occupy LA and other cities with our concepts for an enhanced urban environment. A fruit orchard in place of the public lawn for instance - a gathering place, same water needs, and will provide food for people and wildlife while storing carbon.
    • Dec 18 2011: Cindy,
      Thank you. I agree with your thoughts. E me at appelgreenroof@yahoo.com
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: My ideal city would be 100% energy independent: being capable of providing its own food and transport by maximising the use of automation and investing all of its resources into developing its people through vocations such as healthcare, education and research. A bit like Masdar City, but without the limitations of the monetary based economy.
  • Dec 8 2011: The Venus Project or A Resource-Based Economy!!
  • Dec 7 2011: Humans -
    -Living animal species with relatively Much powerful Cognitive Hardware
    -Born with Innate curiosity to learn and explore
    -Require basic necessities for survival
    -Able enough to accomplish great feats if their passion goes well nourished

    City 2.0 needs to -
    -Provide Basic necessities for survival
    -With fear of basic necessities gone, shall provide for information (free from normative fallacies) and guidance so as to cultivate ones curiosity and passion
    -Use Clean renewable energy sources
    -Try to automate the city processes like manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc as much as possible, so as to free humans from labor and let them use their brains
    -Implement sustainable processes like Recycling

    And The Venus Project City Design Model does just that.......
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: I wish for the City 2.0 to have a uniform public transportation system. Not buses, tramsways, trains, a metro system, but a standardized and centralized system. There is only one type of street for cars, there is only one type of sidewalk for pedestrians, so why do there have to be ten different ways to use public transport? If streets and sidewalks are the arteries of urbanized life, then public transport in its current state is equivalent to atherosclerosis. It slows us down, it's complicated to switch from one to another (coming out of the metro, you really don't want to rund around the station for five to ten minutes just to find the right bus) -- and we're in a bad mood when we are crammed into the train. And I don't want to be in a bad mood when I'm enjoying the wonders of the City 2.0.
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: The way that everyone considered is diffrent.so if we have a uniform public transportation system,who can insure this is good for everyone.so t think the key is that whether people impose their personal intersts on other people.
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: Simone, as someone who has been pushing boundaries on public transport for most of my career, each mode has its role and its unique one. Each mode contributes a different time-space-capacity profile. Not everything can be all stops, unless we all get a TARDIS or there is a global Teleport system developed. Until then, each mode will have a role, and what the challenge is, how best do we utilise these according to the patterns of where people want to go to? Transfer should not be too difficult it the system is designed as a system, and each mode turns up when it should, with clear signage so everyone knows where to go. Having designed a public transport interchange, I know that experience of the place and its movement should be beautiful, as well as functional, and easy to find your way.
  • Dec 7 2011: I wish we could change HOW we structure and group people so they were more able to manifest their full potential: less institutions, rigid structures and one size fits all rules, more fluid, multi-dimensional cooperatives, community values and non-zero sum economics.

    There would be amazing spaces occupied by groups who would attract members according to shared values etc. These groups would be self sustaining and allow the individuals to work individually and together. For example, one might be focused on creating chemical, plastic free consumer products and designs and educating people about these things and running recycling for the community. Another group might do loads of art and events, teach children about creativity, and outsource creative services to others. Again a community contribution would be expected. the big part of my wish is rather than inefficient top down management the system would be set up to allow organisations and groups to emerge. The flow would be organic and that would mean that the ones that didnt get sustainable don't survive. Larger infrastructure issues like food, water, sanitation etc. could be handled by not for profit groups that sold it to consumers at cost plus a percentage for running it. The people in these groups would take a percentage of what was sold and that percentage would be public so people could decide for themselves which farm collective to buy from. In this way everyone in the city would have access to the essentials of life, community, basic sustainable products, education and livelihood according to their choice, their interests, their passions and their ability to create, collaborate and evolve. We'd have to find something compassionate to serve anyone who fell through those cracks but I suspect they would be minimal.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: City 2.0 - A place where magical possibilities are brought alive due to the unbounded imagination of its citizens. Where ethical conduct is woven within the fabric of its foundations, unbridled materialism is looked down upon, and empathy and care are inculcated and rewarded. It is a city where the streets are safe for children to walk at night and nature and human beings live in balance. Its citizenship is a privilege, each person strives for enlightenment, and where discovering the hidden meanings, relationships, and patterns within nature is considered one's duty and responsibility. City 2.0 inspires its citizens to take on the biggest and most mind boggling challenges of nature, and solves each problem successfully, sustainably, and confidently. It is a city where differences in ethnicities, religions, and cultures are essential to its success, and where individuals express their personal preferences, choices, and identities without worrying about being gamed or abused by others. Here civic responsibility is exalted as a high virtue and city elders nurture their young. City 2.0 families live in peace, and don't consider respect/love for others as optional. Citizen of City 2.0 ("Citizen 2.0") contributes generously their time and knowledge towards increasing the base of good knowledge, and in the process enable life itself to become more persistent and resilient. City 2.0 is a conscious organism, and through this self-awareness it can recognize and defend its vision and values. City 2.0 can process information and allocate resources efficiently, economically, and with care. City 2.0 doesn't burden itself (or its citizens) unnecessarily, and underwrites the well-being of the marginalized segments within its population. Ultimately, it recognizes that City 2.0 is only as healthy or relevant as the most unhappy or downtrodden Citizen 2.0. City 2.0 is an idea that is infectious, it is a an undertaking of labor and love.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: We need a wikipedia of City 2.0 ideas - ideas from around the world that others can tap into and share their experiences. This is where tried and tested ideas can be shared with others and where improvements can be contributed. Unlike a blog which seems to attract negative comments - the wiki idea would have page supporters which would ensure that the content is relevant and without agenda or promotions. Each idea would need a full description of features and benefits, a how to section and a contact for further details. I see it almost as a franchise section that does not include a license fee. One idea I have heard about is turning the roof tops of city buildings into gardens - not new - but there must be a lot of experience about what works and what does not. There is little to be gained from commercialising this idea - far more from sharing it - but how do you go about it and what is involved. Or the city bike system - already taking over in Paris and London - this needs to be shared in other cities too. What are the issues and how is this best done?
  • thumb

    . .

    • +2
    Dec 7 2011: I have been dreaming of living in Jack Fresco's city ever since I watched his film. The Venus project now. It is the most thought out design. Brilliant!!
  • Dec 6 2011: I think Jacque Fresco said everything already about this topic.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Real food is grown in the city, brought in from the local country areas.
    Fresh, organic wholefood prepared with love and integrity is available on every corner, prepared in every home.
    Junk food is recognized as dangerous and taxed heavily or optimally made illegal
    Farmers are rewarded for growing food with integrity.
    How to grow food and prepare wholefood is taught in every school.
    Gardens replace lawns.
    Permaculture is practiced over Pesticide.
    Unadulterated water comes from springs instead of chemically treated reservoir water.
    People come together in community to share meals, friends, family, we are meant to eat together.
    Love is part of every table setting.
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: I particularly like your remarks on sustainability teachings in schools. I'm moving my daughters to a district this summer that does just that!
    • Dec 9 2011: yes localized and decentralized. One of my fave Ted Talks is on "Vertical Farming" in case you haven't seen it yet. I really like a lot of what your are saying here. Another great documentary you can find online on this topic is
      -doc The Economics of Happiness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgjr-IUqh_8&feature=related


      As for banning things. Prohibition never works. It only drives things underground and creates a black market and crime. Let people eat what they want to eat it's their body. However, education on nutrition is key. I don't think punishment is good for society. Understanding as much as we can on why people behave the way they do and helping to treat them is best. If you haven't seen


      -doc Zeitgeist: Moving Forward http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w

      check it out. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.

      Best
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: The End of Nations and the Rise of Cities
    The famous quote "We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us" by Winston Churchill should be changed to "We shape our CITIES and thereafter they shape us." I think cities and the surrounding environment (urban or non-urban) within which buildings are located are more significant in shaping our human experience than individual buildings.
    Globalization is reshaping our human experience and is making cities more important than nations. The future will depend on cities networking and management. My wish is to see cities become independent of nations and states; "real" global cities that provide opportunities for all human beings regardless of their nationality and background. Cities that provide real "Cities-zenship" and not "State-zenship".
    I wish that City 2.0 is not an "expanded nor inflated" City 1.0! I wish to see regional and global networks of cities that provide shared and enhanced human experience and opportunities for all. Rich cities should network with poor cities and create a conglomeration or cluster that provides shared and enhanced experience for all. City 2.0 is a City to become and not a City to be.
  • Dec 6 2011: I would wish for an educational environment and system that would nurture the whole child. One that would foster the body-mind connection, and respect for all people, regardless of religion,color, race, gender, gender identity and economic status. Where strengths were identified and challenge areas addressed. Where every student was empowered to become productive members of our society and to live happy, healthy lives.
    Those are my wishes for the future.
  • Dec 6 2011: I've got a few ideas for the city 2.0 that I've been tossing around.

    Putting automobile traffic and parking lots underground will allow buildings to be built closer together and wil leave more space for parks and gardens throughout the city. Also by making roads and cars used in the city "smart" it would eleviate the congestion we see today.

    The city should be design to produce as much of its food as possible. Urban agriculture utilizing aquaculture combined with hydroponics/aeroponics will provide access to fresh food in a highly sustainable way.

    Construct the city to collect and purify rainwater.

    Add a package delivery system connecting homes and businesses (probably some type of delivery system utilizing mag-lev tach). This would eliminate a lot of larger vehicle traffic.

    Finally I'll leave you with two of the more idealistic ideas.
    1. The city should be built to be easily deconstructed in a way that doesn't generate the waste we currently get from demolitions. A century from now when tech calls for a new design it won't be ignored because of the cost or difficulty of implementing the change. To accomplish this I suggest modular buildings and systems that can be taken apart in chunks without disturbing the functionality of the rest of the building or city.
    2. The city should be designed as a large university, making its highest priority education and R&D. This will give the cities populace a shared purpose further unifying them, and I can think of no purpose more worthy than education.
  • Dec 6 2011: For City 2.0 I wish that all children living in the City are directly involved in imagining, creating and building solutions for the future...DIRECTLY involved (they almost never are)....after all, they are the inhabitants of City 2.0 and should be participants in building their home.
    • thumb

      Peter R

      • +1
      Dec 8 2011: J Gonzalez, Where the City 2.0 prize approach to the future of the city is a globally integrative approach of the thousands of ideas that are already on the ground making a difference already, children of all ages can be at heart of this playing a role in every city where there is physical presence, helping build, host, or contributing their ideas. Where it is virtual, they can also participate, and collaborate with their peers online in what ever city they are attracted to or want to help, as well as their own.

      By being both a physical presence and a virtual presence, like a modern urban library of alexandria, collaboratively built in every city around the world by local partners and volunteers, linked by the virtual can work together. That way, each city's contextualised solutions can be examined and adapted by other cities. This is not a high-brow C40 approach, but a grass roots approach so that anyone can log on, and see the solutions, and how they work. If they want, they can go and visit the local branch, and see some of the solutions in practice. The children could explain how they contributed and helped build the local sustainability house that demonstrates to their area just how local houses can be made sustainable, and their lifestyle could even be improved by this.
      • Dec 8 2011: Hi Peter - I do agree that City 2.0 adopts/adapts the open source model and that we can builld on the good work already being done by young people everywhere...I like to think of it as a "sandbox" where a variety of challenges are presented and different groups address those where they feel they can make the greatest contribution.

        Kids bring their eyes with them (their own way of seeing) that enables them to find unique solutions.
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: You hit on the first response I intended to post. Of course, I'm quite biased in this respect given my background in education, but involving children directly in this process would be key. Such an initiative as city 2.0 would require long-term commitment from all involved and this cannot be done without our youngest who will be expected to sustain the effort. It is important to note, however, that I do not hold romanticized notions of children's contributions as solely unique to the young. Every person of every generation has a unique perspective and set of abilities.

      My primary concern is equalizing our education. It is remarkably short-sighted to expect a nation to grow and prosper without ensuring that each and every citizen be prepared for the world they enter. The vast majority of concerns expressed in this forum may be either eliminated entirely or greatly improved with a well educated public (whatever form that education may take).
      • Dec 8 2011: Hi Amy - I agree that everyone contributes and is reflected in the realm of ideas...but I'm especially conscious of the value fresh perspective brings to a challenge...unlimited by predefined methods or patterns...see below:

        Boy discovers microbe that eats plastic
        PhDs have been searching for a solution to the plastic waste problem, and this 16-year-old finds the answer.

        http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/blogs/boy-discovers-microbe-that-eats-plastic
        • thumb
          Dec 9 2011: What a great story! Fresh perspective definitely helps solve problems, no argument there. So does years of experience and a willingness to collaborate. This makes me wonder if the same idea could be applied to adults who change careers. Is it youth alone that allows people to find creative solutions or simply being entirely new to an experience? I'd be interested to see research on all these topics.
  • Dec 20 2011: I apologize for taking up all this space (9 sections). As the discussion is nearing its close I hope this will not inconvenience anyone. Many others have mentioned similar ideas. Perhaps this synthesis and model of how to will be helpful. Daimon

    Section 1 of 9

    How can we create “a massive collaborative project among the members of the global TED community, and indeed all who care about our planet's future?” Here is the outline of a plan for creating a global system of collective intelligence which continually evolves new and better ways for cities to function.

    Based on local participation, this approach takes local culture, needs and resources into account, creates real change, connects people into local and global action-based networks, produces an evolving global resource of the best ideas for cities so those ideas can spread rapidly, and creates a TED-branded social ecology in collaboration with members and others, resulting in a powerful and growing force for positive global change.

    As the annual TED Conference is the eye-catching centerpiece of the TED community, similarly, an IdeaFest in every interested city and town is the eye-catching local focus for an annual cycle of project-based civic evolution.

    The process works like this: A qualified person or group convenes an IdeaFest and its associate process in a city or town. The IdeaFest rules are put forth by TED, building on the TEDx model, helping ensure quality and consistency and inspiring trust and participation through the credibility of the TED organization.

    TED and its collaborators also create and host the communications infrastructure for all that follows. Sponsors could include the Clinton Foundation with its focus on cities and IBM with its Smarter Cities program, just for starters.
    After appropriate preparation, the IdeaFest invites everyone in the city or town to contribute answers to the organizing question:

    “What is something that would make (our city or town) better?"
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 9 of 9
    As people engage with their neighbors around meaningful aims, social capital will build. Participants will gain confidence and self-respect along with project management, presentation and other practical and interpersonal skills. As they find and work with each other they will build connections and a sense of community. More and higher quality social connections improve mental and physical health, along with disaster resilience, providing perhaps significant additional benefits. Perhaps most important, the idea that what happens is up to the people, not the powers that be, will take root and spread.

    Thus, while much happens online the face to face, community-level connections are vital. The whole political spectrum might become engaged because everyone has ideas about how to make their community better. If this opportunity is handled well (a creative challenge to be sure) the quality of public discourse and public information will improve.

    Forms of engagement can shift from polarized opposition to creative inquiry into the shared question, “How can we make our city or town better?” Discussions (perhaps facilitated) of what “better” means could be rich and might move people beyond ideological preconceptions through human interaction and the simple but powerful experience of being heard. This civic and civil engagement is one of the less obvious but most important aims of this project.

    Finally, and obviously, there will be an annual TED Global City 2.0 gathering and event celebrating the most amazing projects and their instigators and leaders from around the world. This will create enormous global visibility, build momentum for the whole project and help shift the direction of global culture toward sustainable well-being for all beings.

    If you have read this far, thank you. I welcome your thoughts in reply. My website for this line of thought is http://www.MissionQuestion.com
  • thumb
    Dec 20 2011: City 2.0 will be the Natural and Smart City, a city first and foremost centred on the laws of nature; a resilient, highly integrated self-sufficient dynamic place where the best of the past and present meet to generate positive outputs and outcomes. It will be the intersection of communications technology, urban farming, mobility services, innovative living arrangements, renewable district energy, and intelligent infrastructure. It will be a fine-grained place that conserves water and energy. Waste will be eliminated. City 2.0 will be highly localized and synchronized to its unique physical location on the planet. This sychronization combined with the social energy of the place will generate a unique culture.

    By design, every decision, action and object in City 2.0 will enhance the natural world in some way; improving biodiversity, keeping air and water clean. As the Romans did, City 2.0 will mandate solar access. Every human-made component will have multiple purposes. Material, energy and water flows will be managed to cascade through the city- every useful bit will be squeezed out. Buildings will be reused many times- at the end they will be disassembled into useful materials

    City 2.0 will reconnect us with all the functions of living - educate us about growth cycles, energy, biology, the food chain and so on. It will likely be a more labour intensive city and an incubator for local entrepreneurs. It will be a city composed of engaged citizens, rather than passive consumers. Its form and walkability will liberate its occupants and their time. Its mixed-use, mixed-income, mixed-age composition will encourage interaction and creativity.

    Technology will enhance City 2.0. Telecommuting will be the default mode of working for those whose jobs can be done that way. Transit, cycling and vehicle sharing will make up most of the wheeled transportation. City 2.0 will be made up of 20-minute neighbourhoods to make living equitable & enjoyable for all ages and abilities
  • Dec 17 2011: The city of the future may be in our minds. We should integrate computer technology with our own minds, much like how bacteria integrated mitochondria into their cell structure billions of years ago. Imagine if we eliminate forgetfulness, indecision, and miscommunication. And learn to control our desires and emotions. With this advanced intelligence there is no more people doing dumb shit, nothing to fight about. End all this disharmony in the world. We all must act as one, towards the same goal, knowledge.
  • thumb
    Dec 16 2011: Perhaps The City 2.0 will be POWERED BY ART - http://landartgenerator.org
    A clean energy future creates a more healthy, peaceful, egalitarian, and happy City 2.0. And sustainability is not only about resources and consumption, but also about cultural depth and social harmony. Hopefully, the renewable energy power plants of The City 2.0 will inspire the future with their artistic beauty and innovative concepts.
  • Dec 13 2011: CONTINUED FROM POST #2

    10. has been proven through scientific replicated peer reviewed research and infra-red heat maps to reduce, (and if enough people got on board eliminate), the urban heat island effect,
    11. creates a relatively stable indoor temperature year round regardless of climate that would reduce energy needs to a single-story structure such that wind and solar should be able to effectively meet the needs of the entire required usage without grid attachment,
    12. inclusion of a green wall system in companion with the green roof system creates a relatively stable indoor temperature year round regardless of climate that would reduce energy needs to a multi-story structure such that wind and solar should be able to effectively meet the needs of the entire structure usage without grid attachment,
    13. future designed and built environments would include these technologies to create a sustainable planet where there is no need for grid electricity subject to solar flares (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=373629) as well as a future not laden with cancer causing radiation from fuel leaking nuclear reactors. (www.enenews.com) (The life of Plutonium is approximately 240,000 years. It's daughter products will be around much longer than we will. Now, is the time to start to allow the proven method of landscapes that literally clean the air to start their magic. i.e.: The Amazon and the pine forest at Chernobyl.)

    Incidentally, the above referenced technology currently exists. I have developed, tested, as well as had independent scientific peer reviewed verification and publication of said technology and patented an approach that has been proven to do all of the above. I would like to engage and collaborate with the TED PRIZE team. I would also like to incorporate previous winners of the TED prize into my wish for The City 2.0.

    CONTINUE TO POST #4
    • Dec 16 2011: This such a common sense approach to the challenges we face in the very near future, that I cannot imagine why they would not receive serious consideration and effort for immediate implementation. We are the stewards of this world and we have a responsibility to take care of it, but, at the same time we have to live and thrive here on our home. It is obvious that we working class people cannot afford to continue along the path that we are on, and Jennifer's solutions seem a practical and affordable way to accomplish both goals.
  • Dec 13 2011: CONTINUED FROM POST #1
    Method to create my wish with the above referenced features for The City 2.0:
    1. utilizing the technology of a five pound per square foot (or heavier if so desired), green roof system that could be retrofitted on any existing structure with any slope,
    2. would allow the green roof flowering plants to purify rain water and utilize the toxins in that rain water as nutrients to grow the plants,
    3. naturally purifying the rain water would allow that water to be used as potable water within the building structure,
    4. the excess remainder of the purified rain water not harvested for building use would reduce the amount and toxicity of runoff into the natural environment thus reducing major flood events caused by our currently engineered drainage systems, (Tropical Storm Allison flooded the majority of downtown Houston in 2003. If each single family residential structure in the affected area had a total of two 50 gallon water barrels retaining the rain water, the flood event that caused more than one Billion dollars in economic damage would not have occurred.)
    5. the excess remainder of the purified rain water not harvested for building use would reduce the amount and toxicity of runoff into the natural environment as releasing the excess purified rain water would also reduce the dead zones in our waterways and oceans,
    6. utilizing composting technologies to eliminate waste stream products and utilize those products in the on-site landscapes would reduce landfill space and waste water operations,
    7. allows for the creation of potable water out of thin air in arid regions,
    8. allows for the growth of nutrient dense food on the structure reducing energy transportation from off-site food producing locations to right above a person's head, on the roof or on the wall,
    9. allows for the replacement of lost natural habitat,
    10. CONTINUED IN NEXT POST #3
  • Dec 13 2011: The City 2.0: An Evolutionary Revolution

    While the concept of clustering people into 'small but tall' community 'pods' as espoused in Agenda 21, (UN adoption by resolution, circa 1992), and visually in the movies such as Zeitgeist and Gattica, I believe those cities may be built for the future; however, we also need to address the current living conditions we have at the moment.

    My TED wish to change the world features an ideal mind, body, soul, and construction solution to The City 2.0 where:
    1. the houses, offices, shopping places and entertainment locations create their own power, water, nutrient dense food and reduce or eliminate effluent and toxins leaching into the environment both by retrofitting current patented technology on existing structures while building the future modular and scalable concept cities with these patented technologies at the fore, and;
    2. an environment that is given the opportunity to heal itself while still accommodating the enlarging population and their engineered built environment. (We are not going to raze our existing cities until we have built a place to put the people and we cannot do that without costly infrastructure - unless the places we build create our infrastructure for each location thus allowing people to be self reliant and less of a strain on the natural environment. i.e.: Tokyo is facing this problem right now.), and;
    3. individual tastes in art and architecture are still valid and can be seen in The City 2.0 while being able to accomplish both of the goals in item numbers 1 and 2.

    Method to create my wish with the above referenced features for The City 2.0:
    1. utilizing the technology of a five pound per square foot (or heavier if so desired), green roof system that could be retrofitted on any existing structure with any slope,
    2. would allow the green roof flowering plants to purify rain water and utilize the toxins in that rain water as nutrients to grow the plants,
    3. CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
  • thumb
    Dec 13 2011: well...what should i say..!!kudos to such a project...i mean such a thoughtful one...on a short not i would like to say mumble a few words....a city ..rather an ecosystem of various social diversions living in a harmonic and mutual collaboration....sounds good but if viewed in reality it's even better..i would suggest the city to be an ecosystem with the co-existence of love,harmony and obviously peace...it's only if we stay connected ...and if we understand each other...what we want to convey...it's high time we show the Mayan calendar (P.S. i mean no offence to the Mayan civilization.) that this world ain't gonna end in 2012 ..rather 2012 would account for the rebirth of a new city...EARTH 2.0...I'm sorry to be bit lengthy..but when a project such as this in under development who would stay behind...LET THE EARTH RULE ..!!!once again....:)..signing out...with pleasure..:)
  • Dec 13 2011: Make it easily walkable, great public transportation, lots of public parks, places for average citizens to meet. A great model is Paris, at least that part built before 1920.
  • Dec 12 2011: This is from the Dalai Lama. This will also work for me.

    "My hope and wish is that one day, formal education will pay attention to what I call “education of the heart.” Just as we take for granted the need to acquire proficiency in the basic academic subjects, I am hopeful that a time will come when we can take it for granted that children will learn, as part of the curriculum, the indispensability of inner values: love, compassion, justice, and forgiveness."
  • Dec 12 2011: Here is what around 100 Middle School Students said should be included: (List is not in any specific order)

    zero pollution: Buildings, cars, products, etc, should all be made with as little emissions into the atmosphere as possible. The life of products from creation to recycle should be thought of before introducing anything new.

    green energy capturing devices should be designed into as many (if not all) types of infrastructure as possible. Bridges that operate on solar, wind and tidal energies, buildings lined with solar panels and use only the energy that they produce,

    Plant life should be required in as many places that can sustain them: including apartment buildings and back yards. Producing your own food is part of any sustainable environment. Possibly give credits to those who produce as a way of encouragement.

    Health care should be provided to all those in need. There should be no cost to the individual when they are sick. How to implement this is difficult, but needs to be done, because taking care of citizens should be the number one priority of any society.

    Transportation should be stream lined. Bicycle and walking should be the most used forms of transportation, but buses and other forms of mass transit should be the secondary. Only if cars do not produce waste/pollution or burn fossil fuels should they be allowed. Even the materials the cars are made of should be looked at.

    Robots and other forms of automation should be utilized, especially for those who are disabled or unable to do certain things.

    Space exploration and other science centers should be utilized and funded to the fullest potential. Students should be able to have access to cutting edge technology, tools and information. An emphasis on exploration would give the community a goal to reach for, always looking to improve and expand their abilities and knowledge.
  • Dec 10 2011: the venus project, resource based economy
    we have to realize and admit that monetaryism is outdated and obsolete, stop trying to sacrifice eficiency, abundance and sustainability for econmic gain and so called opertunity.

    watch zeitgeist moving forward: zeitgeistmovingforward.com
  • thumb
    Dec 10 2011: Hi. I think the best teleological idea for a City and for the human future is The Venus Project.
  • thumb
    Dec 10 2011: I Wish the world archive The Venus Project goals, Resource Based Economy for the new city 2.0, free renewal energy, free water, its posible we can do anything
    TED Vid
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ghhgUmGBjX8
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrdyeW2YUzQ&feature=player_embedded
    www.thevenusproject.com
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: A Citizen-Based Process for Finding Creative Solutions to Challenges Facing Cities Across the Globe

    1. Designate one week in early 2013 during which every city around the world that wants to participate will hold a “community forum” open to all its citizens. The goal of the forum will be to develop a vision for the community’s future 50 years -- or about two generations -- from now.
    -- The aim: Encourage creative ideas. Identify obstacles and opportunities. Talk about how your city’s future will also take into account global challenges (each community forum can discuss what it considers the most significant global challenges).
    -- At the end of the community forum, participants will name two people -- one man, and one woman -- to represent the city at a national forum. Each forum will decide on its method of making this selection.

    2. Hold a national forum in late 2013 along the same lines as the community forums that started the process. This will be an opportunity to listen to what representatives from other cities in your country have discussed.
    -- The goal will be to outline the primary challenges cities in your country face and develop creative ideas for solving them -- while also taking into account global challenges.
    -- At the end of the national forum, participants will name up to ten people -- evenly balanced between men and women -- to attend a global forum. Each national forum will decide on its method of selecting delegates to the global forum. The findings of each national forum will be presented to a session of the nation’s legislative body or assembly.

    3. Hold a global forum in 2014 along the same lines as the community and national forums. Listen to what representatives from other nations have to say. The aim: identify obstacles and opportunities for the future of the world’s cities, while considering creative solutions.
    -- The global forum will present its findings and call for action to a special session of the United Nations.
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: Wayne,

      We are working on a platform that could essentially handle what you are saying as well as keep things local. I am drafting a more complete response and would appreciate your thoughts.

      http://nolewalkingshaw.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/city-2-0/

      http://prezi.com/tdozumz2s8a3/ynslc-prezi/
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: Nole, appreciate your reply and those links -- which I just visited. It was very interesting to read about what Salt Lake City has done so far, and the ideas for increasing civic engagement. That certainly links closely to what I have in mind; as well as the "platform" for public participation that you set out. Certainly having an inclusive process also means involving the many members of the community who don’t have the time or interest to show up at a meeting or forum in a specific physical location.

        The key, as Salt Lake City appears to realize, is developing a process that engages citizens so they can take the lead in planning for their community’s future. It’s from the energy and ideas that citizens bring that creative (and ultimately “do-able”) ideas are most likely to emerge.

        While the proposal I outlined proposes moving sequentially from the local to the national to the global level -- and I’ll admit that would be a very ambitious undertaking -- it’s aim is to keep the process citizen-based throughout.

        The other important aspect of what I proposed is asking citizens to focus on solutions to long-range problems facing their own communities, while at the same time keeping in mind a global perspective. Not quite sure how that could be done, and it certainly wouldn’t be easy, but I think it’s important to see how what we’re doing in our own communities relates to global concerns (whether it’s energy or water consumption; demographics; use of raw materials; trade; or other issues).
  • Dec 8 2011: well..
    first thing City 2 needs, is to be a fully sustainable city.

    with 100% use of green renewable energy of any kind possible for free to the users.
    probably has vertical farms to grow lots of food without taking large area.
    clean water for everybody.
    fully automated garbage system and sewage.
    no private cars.
    automatic transportation from any place to any other place..
    best airport in the world.
    robots to clean the city.
    places to get stuff for free..
    a house for everyone that lives in the city (for free).
    modular houses that you can change, like adding or removing a new apartmant to and from a building.
    no city hall..
    places to get out and have fun for free.
    places you can go to and learn and educate yourself.
    lots of green stuff (plants) anywhere you look..
    the best school in the world with real education where money is not the incentive to make you smart (or dumb).
    best hospital in the world where money is not the incentive to heal you (or kill you)..
    no spying cameras (CCTV?) on the street.
    no banks.
    no police
    no selling of anything, and no giving of any important resource to anyone without any good use for it, anything that is rare will go to everybody in the form of technology, no one really has to wear gold earings, necklaces or any other jewelery(i can see girls screaming to the screen right now, but dont worry you can have things that looks exactly the same), this gold can be used to make electronics for everybody, resources belongs to everyone.
    sensors to monitor all resources available in the area and in stock and a computer to compute the needs of the people and the capability of the system..

    Resource Based Economy by The Venus Project..
  • Dec 7 2011: I wish all our elected politicians and their bureaucrats were competent. THAT would make all the difference to the world.
  • Dec 7 2011: I wish City 2.0 would look like this:

    http://www.rollerhaus.com/reclaiming-natures-metropolis-a-living-building-language/

    Reclaiming Nature's Metropolis is a look into the future of Chicago where instead of imagining how technology will save us from having to change, we imagine the change from within--the social and behavioral modifications necessary to arrive at a more sustainable existence. The imagery you see is a manifestation of that behavioral evolution as it begins to reclaim the urban landscape.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: in order for a city 2.0 to take shape, it must begin with a massive shift of popular perspective. i see here a debate between a jingo-ist capitalist by the name of michael and tvp admirer's, too many to name, this is a great start.

    my wish is that a great "summit of the minds" come together to formulate a road map toward a true city 2.0.. something similar in social structure to the constitutional convention of the united states, wherby the founding fathers of the u.s arduosly hammered out the details of the document known as the constitution. this was a collection of the "greatest minds in the land" at that time, and the language scribed has stood as a pillar for over two centuries from the late 1700's through the industrial age to present day.

    i believe ted to be well positioned to sanction such a "summit of the minds" with the "city 2.0" as a mission statement, i believe an initial list of potental delegates should be crowd sourced and then whittled down by process of vote to a core group of advanced thinkers ranging from scientists and economists to professors and military leaders and all diciplines in between.

    the world is clearly in need of paradigm evolution... it would be imperitive that such a "summit" be promoted as an event to the masses on a level higher than the world series, superbowl, or any other media hyped events combined.... this is the future of humanity.. this is my wish.
    • thumb
      Dec 7 2011: At the moment, we're the "summit of the minds" right here.
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: yes paul.. this is a "summit of the minds" so to speak.. however we are mainly of the same ilk here.. also while i am not the dullest blade in the drawer, i don't pretend to be one of the world's best thinkers.. i do believe i come up with world-class ideas all of the time, in fact i know this...

        which brings me back around to my initial proposal/wish regarding a city 2.0.. concerning a resource based economy i personally love the idea.. and think it would work well within the context of the minds present in this forum.. but just type the word "fight" into youtube.. the types of people who will be listed in video after video also have to be accounted for. in the zeitgeist's "moving forward" peter joseph accounts for this with the stance of his pundits alluding to people are products of their environment, and to this i can concede to.. however our current reality is what needs to be dealt with in order to make any transition.. which brings me back to MASSIVE SHIFT IN POPULAR PERSPECTIVE, AND THEREFORE HOW TO ACHIEVE THIS.

        the masses are sheep... this is self-evident..sheep need guidance.. sheep follow KEY FIGURES..

        a summit of the minds of key people could include people such as; jaques fresco, bill gates (as steve is no longer with us), peter joseph, martin armstrong, collin powell.. etc, etc.. with a mission statement..
        • thumb
          Dec 8 2011: One tricky point is to get into this summit people whose views one agrees with, so their recommendations will be right and true. Imagine if they're "jingo-ist capitalists" instead. It's like the Supreme Court, where the meaning of the law depends entirely on who the judges are. There's been a good deal of experience before with such "summits" of "thinkers," and several have morphed into on-going "think tanks," each of whose conclusions on any subject are famously predictable, since they all seem to think in pre-trod tracks. But best of luck. Another thinkers' summit can't hurt.
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: thanks for the best luck wishes ;-) ... i would like to emphasize that a fundamental difference which i outlined in my first paragraph is that such a summit would need to have the same media hype as all of the largest media hyped events combined, ie, U.S presidential election campaigns, superbowl, world series, etc.. this would need a world wide media push to bring it into the local conversations around the globe..

        as you pointed out there have already been "summits of the minds" or "think-tanks" the problem being they are relegated to a corner where mainly academia and the like even have knowledge of these think-tanks existence...

        also a major element would be... that no, the final delegates do not have to be like-minded in approach, but yes in goal, ie, city 2.0 or PARADIGM EVOLUTION.. CIVILIZATION 2.0, so by the nature of the mission statement, a person like say Rick Perry, would be DISQUALIFIED as be believes in GOING BACK TO TRADITIONAL "VALUES" (sorry this guy is a text book putz hahah, im bad..)

        SO AGAIN THE KEY IS MAJOR MEDIA PUSH FOR AWARENESS OF SAID SUMMIT..

        maybe i will work on trying to rally this together..

        in regards to the initial point of this forum... there is in my opinion no use for a city 2.0 unless the people who would inhabit such a city have evolved in their basic individual perspectives of how to approach life itself and their surroundings..
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: My wish is for The City 2.0 is to define a manifesto for cities with forward-thinking leaders to adopt, and then implement in an experimental, locally optimized way over a relatively short period of time. It's about a shared vision for urban environments that meet the most basic human needs in a sustainable way.

    I see this wish being developed collaboratively between interested city leaders around the world, enabled by existing technology and driven by a small organization of staffers (funded by the TED prize) and volunteers. The manifesto would be short and easy for all citizens to understand. It would encompass a limited set of goals, say 3, that could be achieved in cities around the world in a limited time frame, say 5 years.

    The manifesto could be like a brand, a sort-of Fair Trade label that cities could adopt as they drive to achieving the goals. Citizens could hold their politicians and community leaders accountable to achieving the goals.

    The basis of this idea is to start small in developing a project for 'massive collaboration' to achieve City 2.0. Put the infrastructure in place, make it a truly crowd sourced movement, weave it into the political and economic structure of cities on a large scale across the world, and get the foundation of collaboration in place. Then move from City 2.0 to City 3.0, and so on.

    It's about what will be 'the platform for global crowd sourced city collaboration'. It could leverage TED to get started and it could bounce off the TEDx model of organically spreading through a loosely controlled, branded model.

    Here's an example of what a manifesto could include as goals:
    1. Make healthy, locally grown food accessible to every citizen at an affordable price.
    2. Build infrastructure for people to use their bodies for transportation again (instead of cars).
    3. Bring back the notion of a physical 'commons' where people can gather and share ideas.

    Or, whatever. Goals would be decided by collaboration.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: (finishing!)

    the sold goods right on the spot.
    People would be real citizens, and democracy would work for people, not companies. People could be part of a neighborhood council, and each council would have a representative at a City Assembly, constituted by representatives of every city neighborhood. This assembly would be responsible to discuss city budget, problems, future, development and ethics.
    Each neighborhood would be represented by a diverse group, where old, young and children would have its voice. Farmers would be part of the City Assembly.
  • Dec 7 2011: See this video! This is how it should be done! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YjCgezXsaU
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: The Wish: That Agile Architecture will characterise The City 2.0

    The Manifesto: Agile Architecture and the Excessive Future of Urbanism: A Manifesto against Static, Sustainable cities [Rachel Armstrong & Neil Spiller]

    We must shepherd the excesses of the material world to achieve symbiotic collaboration between architect, chemist and city.
    Progressive inertia in the name of sustainability or conservation is nothing but preparation for urban and therefore societal failure.
    We reject the conformist conviviality of ‘green’ shrouds.
    Materiality is a multi-dimensional phenomenon not confined by carbon and energy narratives.
    Life is a high-energy agile interface.
    Agile architecture resists decay towards equilibrium.
    Agile architecture performs differently in different contexts.
    Agile architecture is robust and has the capacity to surprise us.
    Agile architecture must touch the ground lightly.
    Agile architecture manages and is predicated by change.
    Agile architecture is what it is – it is neither complicated nor simple.
    Agile architecture is vital for life.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: I had been thinking about this for some time and TED has given me the inspiration to shape the idea in a better way.

    Here is my simple wish: A large majority of Human Population living in socially vibrant, culturally diverse, economically prosperous and environmentally sustainable 350 high-density cities by the year 2062.

    If you like this wish, give it a thumbs-up, it will inspire me more.I am now working on a roadmap and will share it with all of you in few weeks.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: Together we have all the ideas, the creativity and the knowledge to shape the world.

    I'd like to create a platform where we could share our ideas, design cities and test our knowledge of life.
    Visual, evolutionary, transparent and connected.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: "City 2.0" is already here. Invest in and accelerate the existing movement for peer to peer local governance. Growing this is the missing dimension in society. We already have too many top-down high design efforts. Empower the networks of people who are already increasingly active in the everyday places of their lives... the places they occupy, choosing to occupy their time for social good. $100,000 could best by used by amplifying an existing project like the NSF funded project that is Open Assembly... fund a pilot for a deserving community, connect with existing efforts. Connect it to urban planning and Placemaking. Do it. Iterate it. Less top down pie in the sky, more bottom up trimtab. http://www.openassembly.org ...this would be a creative effort that fuels what has already been ignited, what already is a nascent but growing massive collaboration lifestyle.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish for City 2.0

    Life is a balance and for every individual the level of balance is different for everyone. Only you can define your balance and we are here to provide a guidance or be an influence or provide ideas of how we can better our lives through the “Lifestyle Pack System: City 2.0”

    Target Audience:
    This City2.0 is for people who desire a good, simple, happy and healthy life, There are no addictions. Everything is possible in a planned way.

    Basically there are 4 housing systems
    1) the Family of 3 or more
    2) the couple
    3) the individual
    4) the beginner – is defined as a young person coming to his own, or someone who has fallen out and getting back to society.

    In the city 2.0, anyone who adopt this concept lives by the mission of innovation, living green, living life of balance and sustainability.

    In this community, everyone has access to the basic essentials: Good food, clean water, and, a home that has in built in recycling access, internet access, community transportation and a job.

    This cell community has homes, schools, offices, shops, clinics, social meeting areas, etc. everything needed to create a successful well run community. Because all decisions are made by performance and objective decisions, race, prejudice, sex, discriminations , beauracaies are all non -existent.

    The community is very well designed, functional, cost effective and well run. It is a module system where by cell systems can be interchanged if a thing does not fit.

    If all the guidelines are followed, and everyone does their part, then all the communities will grow and flourish.

    This is a community that really helps people and prevent the falling out.

    - As I did my research further, I was excited to find www.thevenusproject.com. This is our future. I think for this environment way to work, people need choices and challenges to strive for.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: City 2.0 needs to be human-centered, flexible, ecologically integrated, and regenerative. They should demonstrate humility with a focus on being "net-zero" at the least, meaning that their negative impacts on the life systems of the planet are "zero." If possible these should be positive sums, for example, water and air should be cleaner because a city exists, energy generated, and people happier! They should be designed through systems thinking, maximizing living technology from soil on up.

    The process for their design should also be inclusive, hearing from the most marginalized communities.
  • Dec 6 2011: City 2.0 is a place where sustainability not only means responding to our impacts on the physical environment and its subsequent impact on us. It is intolerant to human rights abuses, such as forced or child labour practices, where ever they occur – and each individual, business and government are held accountable to their responsibility to combating such abuses. It is a place that actively promotes and improves the well being of others, not just supports their capacity to endure.
  • Dec 6 2011: My wish is that we adopt a simple idea of Stewardship:

    We design and use cities so they are as livable for us as our neighbours, with a respect for the enviroment and those who will follow us.
  • Dec 6 2011: Integrated Permaculture, some such communities exist already as a starting example.

    LESS ROADS, remove half the city blocks in residential areas and you could save a huge amount on infrastructure costs and waste; in some areas removing more... Most people can handle walking to a parking garage; plus it saves on wasteful driveways. This also increases capacity. People probably should walk a mile a day so making them walk half a mile to their transit would benefit all (even less blocks!) Mailbox too.

    DESIGN trains back in! We used to build around the train, now we've removed the tracks and use more trucks.

    High voltage pulsed DC grid; local area step down in some areas direct DC service. Ideally underground and managed like gas, sewer and water are.

    Policy matters. A great design is nothing without a supporting philosophy which is adhered to. Life is not static.

    City owned and operated power grid and data grid - just as the water, sewer, and roads are handled. Power providers compete over the grid just as UPS and FedEx compete over the roads. Allow individuals fair access to this grid to produce power; balancing and managing load is done by the city, likely to be more fair that it is presently. Ideally, power and data lines are underground because long term that is cheaper.

    More experimental house building code exceptions. Incentives and fair treatment for housing co-operatives.

    Empty land tax. Useless grass areas pay tax; gardens do not - make it part of property tax assessment. Remove property taxes for non-profit housing group. Somebody a mini-farm should pay less tax than a typical suburban USA lot.

    Housing developments create a great deal of problems in the USA they do the minimum to pass regulation; rather that ban them, regulate better behavior from them - they never do it on their own. Same for apartment building construction.

    No public parking for sports or event facilities. Save expensive downtown space. Actually, remove all the ramps.
  • Dec 6 2011: For greed to be rendered obsolete.
  • Dec 6 2011: Remove the private automobile from City 2.0 and the rest will take care of itself.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Unless by 'city' we're talking about human scale, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly places, we're not talking about places where people want to actually live.

    If 'city' is the American model, overrun by cars and infrastructure for cars, they are not fit places for children, seniors or others. If 'city' is modeled on car-free European or Asian city centers, with dense housing, walkable amenities and services and public transport, it can be a delightful place to live.

    Conference participants: *Please* think on this before the conference. Go and read the thoughts of Christopher Alexander on livable, human-scale places, or better yet, visit and spend time in such a place, such as Siena. Or do both :).

    There's no point in designing "City 2.0" if it doesn't put people first, and not cars.
  • Dec 6 2011: I have been thinking recently about an Innovation Tax. Bear with me..

    I assume City 2.0 is not starting from a blank sheet of paper but instead a change to an existing city.

    I think it's inherently flawed for a small group of people to make a decision on an issue like this. History has shown that not only is it very difficult to make the right decision from the start, but that any group of people have natural biases. I would have thought the best system to produce this answer would be a system that allows anybody to try, that is based on quick iterations so as to increase the rate of self-correction, and that allows the most meritorious solution to naturally rise to the top. And I don't think this is impossible.

    An Innovation Tax is my current solution based on this philosophy. Admittedly, it is flawed but I think the philosophy appears sound and the resulting solution will improve with time.

    An Innovation Tax is actually quite the contrary to how it may sound. It is a tax imposed by government for certain behaviours of for-profit businesses, scheduled for a specific date in the future. Importantly, the revenues earned by the government are not considered, or negligible, from this tax. The government should expect to earn nothing.

    The proposed tax should be a threat to profits and would provide an opportunity for the entrepreneurs knowledgeable in this area to design solutions which would prevent the business from being exposed to the tax. The businesses are also incentivised to purchase these solutions from the entrepreneurs to avoid paying this tax. This creates an ecosystem of entrepreneurs innovating private businesses toward a better future.

    A trivial example: In 3 years, any food sold directly to the consumer in oil-based packaging will incur an additional sales tax of 25%.
    • Comment deleted

      • Dec 8 2011: I'm aware of the venus project and I realise it has been mentioned a lot on this thread. Allow me to be devils advocate for a moment.

        Firstly, the venus project will not work because it assumes you can start from fresh; that you have no existing requirements to meet and you can 'wipe it all and start again'. It's based on some very interesting thoughts, many of which I think are quite valid but I think it's implementation is notional and impractical - therefore unlikely.

        Secondly, it is theoretical and while its theory may be sound, nobody can be definite about that. Economies, societies and environments are incredible complex and intertwined - it must be possible that strange, unpredictable and possibly severely negative outcomes might arise from implementing the venus project at a large scale. I don't see any element of its implementation which has considered how to deal with this and continue on a positive, iterative path toward its goals.

        Please argue these points, I would like to be corrected.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: La Cintura Verde: A global Greenbelt City and eco-corridor that harnesses existing knowledge and grows organically between 'Pearls'. Pearls are formed of existing Universities or Towns that embrace the 'City 2.0/Cintura Verde' Bill of Rights. and Development Principles. At each Town/University there are 'Quartets' comprised of four recognized experts (ie. Endowed Chairs at Universities) in four separate disciplines. The first quartet might include an Architect, Biologist, Philosopher and an Economist - the second perhaps a Poet, Chemical Engineer, Urban Planner and Physicist. In addition to teaching, each Quartet would together mentor eight scholars, also in a variety of disciplines, in an interdisciplinary, Cintura Verde-specific project. Each year there are more Pearls, and their projects begin to connect them geographically. There is an online forum to get feedback and encourage dialogue. TED Talks, UN Millenium Project, many different forums are a part of it, establishing and maintaining a culture of excellence, dignity and mutual respect. La Cintura Verde becomes a kind of eco/cultural/knowledge/beauty highway. Every four years, the Cintura Verde Symposium gathers all of the Quartets and Scholars together to plan the next stages in its evolution. Rather than creating a uniform mono-culture, La Cintura Verde is a celelbration of the local and a vision of global possibility that nourishes and interacts with the communities along its edges.
  • Dec 6 2011: I wish the cities of the future were low light, enabling us humans to once again live witin the universe that surrounds us.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Get your science right . CO2 , the building block of life , is provably greening the globe but has virtually no effect on our lumped spectrum ( and therefore our temperature ) . There are reasons to be efficient , but this global statist fraud against life and science and freedom is not one of them .
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: City 2.0 should select infrastructure wisely. It's hard to turn back once you've gone down one road (or paved one). Transportation, communications, residential, and work infrastructure should be carefully selected.

    How much space could we save by minimizing space used for streets? What if we all drove golfcarts in the core, for example.

    My personal favorite is a system of slides and elevators, but that's just me.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: The award of TED PRIZE to the IDEA of City 2.0 is a truly outstanding, groundbreaking choice by the leadership of TED conference. BRAVO!

    As a citizen of San Francisco, transplanted 30 years ago from St.Petersburg, Russia (then Leningrad), I have seen the extraordinary potential of this "Jewel of the West" hindered by the low population density and the overall number, still hovering just over 800K residents –– constrained by the obscenely high rents due to the glacial speed of development, limited by the narrow-minded obsession with preserving "historic nature of neighborhoods." Lack of modern high-rise buildings in residential areas and the resultant low population density makes it impractical to develop viable public transport solutions or fund great public schools and new parks. Many professionals who provide both blue and white-colar services to the city simply can not afford to live within its borders.

    Sitting on the edge of Silicon Valley, and hosting some of the most innovative Web 2.0 companies, the city of San Francisco's availability and attraction of great talent is world-class, yet the city's evolution towards becoming a SMART CITY with deep integration of revolutionary IT-based solutions is still embryonic at best.

    Among many others, these factors make the city of San Francisco one of the most ideal candidates for a focused drive towards the City 2.0 transformation.

    iShine Foundation think-tank has been conducting R&D on a broad range of City 2.0 solutions and developed relationships with local political leadership towards exploring the possibility of their deployment through innovative partnerships with established and startup enterprises. However, having outstanding ideas does not produce the required critical mass towards their implementation...

    I hope that the City 2.0 TED Prize will attract great thinkers and leaders to launch some of these ideas into reality by laser-focusing on San Francisco.

    Please contribute comments & links.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: The City 2.0 will balance developed land with Parks of all types including Urban Open Space and Urban Agriculture. The 2.0 City must also have accessible and visible wild spaces. Local Agriculture is a critical component. Sports fields and gardens should be within walking distance for all. This will help to natural develop community and allow for interdependence and entrepreneurship.
  • Dec 6 2011: 1) Explore vertical farms as a way of providing enough local food for the city. Eliminate shipping costs, take pressure off the world food supply, eliminate carbon costs and provide jobs. Vertical farms also recycle water supplies and provide other benefits.
    2) Create a high speed rail line that actually serves the entire city, with natural gas or "green" electric busses running the between route. Create plenty of bike paths, perhaps with safety fences to separate them from the roads. Add electric car filling stations and natural gas filling stations for alternate environmental vehicles for those who wish to own their own. Offer low-cost financing for commuter and cargo bicycles with very small monthly payments.
    3) Enact a direct democracy. City 2.0 has no city council. Instead, it has a website. Issues are posted, debated, and ultimately voted on directly by the public. The directly elected democratically elected Mayor is responsible for executing those decisions.
    4) The City needs to be powered by solar farms and wind farms. Barring that it should provide heavy property tax breaks for anybody who places such power saving devices on their homes.
    5) Corporate accountability is key. Corporations who have shown a good record on fair pay, fair trade, environmental impact and social justice get incentives to come to the city. Those who have shown themselves to be predatory monsters are quietly shown the door. Tax incentives and support are offered to small business first and foremost.
    6) Enact a micro-loan housing program allowing families to buy the foreclosure homes priced at $40,000 and below. Few traditional mortgage companies will service them, so the cheap houses go to investors with enough money to pay lump sum for them who then sell them or rent them at grossly inflated prices. People need homes. Payments could go directly to the city and work incentives could be offered to keep people in homes when they fall behind on their payments.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish is that the City 2.0 encompasses the voices and ideas from the citizens of the city. That they are engaged on how they can help deal with the many environmental and social problems that come with urbanization. As part of the Ushahidi team we are happy to help provide a channel (software) to engage citizens with various channels. Be it twitter, mashups, apps or simple SMS.
    To borrow Adam Greenfield's words 'You are the City' http://urbanscale.org

    Best,
    Juliana
    http://www.ushahidi.com/
  • Dec 6 2011: We should organise a conference on the question of Trust and the city. In the coming century as cities get bigger, the key issues will not just be sustainability, technology, scarcity of commodities, it will be how people can get along with each other in increasingly dense places. Trust must be placed at the centre of all of these issues as it put people first rather than structures. In turn, trust is also enhanced and nurtured by sustainability, technology and density - thus, as history has proven over and over again whether it is modernism, merchantilism or social media, big ideas that do not take a people-first position is bound to fail. City 2.0 is a just city not just the internet of things.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Human locomotion needs to be a necessary part of the design. Biking, walking, jogging, rollerblading, swimming, and any other way that people can get around under the renewable energy source commonly referred to as "hoofing it."
  • Dec 6 2011: My wish is that cities build a network of experimentation and learning around smart technologies and service innovations that will be the main tool to create City 2.0. These "computational leadership networks" should take inspiration from the rapid spread of sustainable innovations like bike sharing and bus rapid transit to cities around the world in just a few years.

    There are two pieces to create this network - a global urban observatory and a network of civic laboratories.

    The global urban observatory would accelerate the sharing not just of best practices around smart solutions, but actual code, models and data. It's difficult enough to see how solutions from one city will work in another, but what if I could run your model using data from my city, or take a piece of code from your solution and see how it would effect mine? The observatory would have the added benefit of allowing us for the first time to systematically standardized demographic and economic indicators across nations. Today, when we compare ever such basic indicators as city population, we're often comparing apples and oranges - a central city in one country versus an entire metro area in another. Those anomalies would yield to the scrutiny of many eyes in the observatory.

    The second piece is a network of urban hackspaces, such as those setup by the City of San Francisco during the "Summer of Smart" in 2011. These civic laboratories would be a convening place for citizens, entrepreneurs, hackers, artists, government officials and mid-level managers, and industry engineers to come together to identify and prototype solutions to urban problems using off-the-shelf and open source tools. These spaces are already being built all over the world, but the network needs to be grown more rapidly and connected together with rich interactive channels of knowledge exchange.

    My wish is that the TED community can pool its resources and make these two projects a reality.
    • Dec 6 2011: Anthony, would be interested to hear more about global urban observatory.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish is for City 2.0, or the city of our future, to be "smart:" smart in transportation and community, smart in the use and conservation of resources such as air, water, space, smart in the design and habitability of new neighborhoods, but also smart in the incorporation of older spaces into the "modern city," smart in the use of science, technology, and data analysis to understand and implement better ideas for education, recreation, and inspiration. I hope we do as good a job as the original designers of Paris and Rome, and better than the desighers of Shenzhen or Bangalaru.
    • Dec 6 2011: I couldn't agree more! Embracing "smart" cities will also spark the innovation and creativity needed to address future issues and concerns, and build a society ready to re-cast those challenges into opportunities for sustainability. Thank you for your comment. I look forward to participating!
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: We should create The Constitution of the Earth based on the ideals of inclusiveness, diversity, sustainability, collaboration and tolerance. We should create a Worldwide Ethical Business Charter and a seal that shows that businesses subscribe to the charter so our buying power can be directed toward companies that believe in promoting the health and well-being of every creature on this planet and sustaining the Earth. We should create a website and database of people committed to growing the idea and spreading the concepts. We should create a world wide open source accredited internet school that teaches every subject to the highest level attainable, utilizing the best teachers on the planet in every subject so every one has access to the best possible education in whatever he or she is passionate about. We must commit to eradicate hunger worldwide. We must bring our religious leaders together to promote inclusiveness and tolerance in the ways we worship and we should have them have a collaborative religious service televised worldwide every year. We should promote ideas that encourage creativity and freedom of expression as that is the root of what moves all of us. All these things are attainable and practical, they are not idealist dreams. Together, we are unstoppable.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 2 of 9

    Jumping to the systems level for a moment, this question remains the same across all participating cities and towns. Consistency is the foundation for interchangeability, enabling the creation of an organized global body of ideas, proposals, projects and results.

    Back to the local event: The point of the question is not idle conversation but the creation of project proposals which can become real projects. Over perhaps three months (to keep the process intense and focused) people respond to the organizing question with their ideas, making connections and engaging in discussion aimed at developing good project proposals. People find each other by interacting around posted ideas that match their own interests and can meet up in person if that is feasible, even using MeetUp.com as a simple solution that already works.

    Connections, discussion, proposal development and so on are all facilitated through the TED software as much as necessary, in conjunction with volunteer facilitators on the ground. Ex-residents and others from afar can also contribute project proposal improvement suggestions through the software system, Skype group discussions or other channels. If resources allow, promising proposals may get expert analysis, support in creating the proposal and coaching on presenting it.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 3 of 9

    The proposal development phase culminates in a PitchFest, the peak moment of the IdeaFest. The PitchFest is like the offspring of TEDx and Kickstarter, with Wikipedia as the godfather. The entire community is invited to be present in person or virtually. Pitches are timed, with the full proposal posted online to be studied. Anyone interested (wherever they are located) can pledge support of all kinds, not only monetary but time, office space, technical expertise, tools and equipment, land for planting, or whatever is needed, creating a potentially global network of shared intelligence, experience, engagement and support.

    Each project will have its own thresholds to clear. Some may simply begin. A group deciding to help each other and others build gardens can just start whenever they decide to. Bigger projects like making a city self-sufficient in food (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2072383/Eccentric-town-Todmorden-growing-ALL-veg.html) could start with what’s available but would also require local government involvement to permit use of city property for growing food and the like. Other projects may need more extensive resources to get started, and will launch when the relevant thresholds are reached.

    The progress of each project is transparently tracked online with regular reports. Along with room for individuality there is standardization to this as well, to assure full information and ease of understanding by readers. Making project updates could be as simple as filling in sections in an online form with the relevant information, images, etc.

    Public tracking gives project members accountability, ongoing visibility, the chance to ask for input on problems, and the opportunity to attract support as needed. Anyone can subscribe to news feeds on any or all projects.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 4 of 9

    To make learning cumulative worldwide, project participants commit to creating or contributing to a manual others can use or adapt as they choose. It might be in the form of an evolving “state of the art” best-practices document, drawing on and linking to the specific examples, similar to Wikipedia but action-oriented. Expert volunteers might take on editing large sets of information such as urban agriculture. A standard format with editorial standards (as with Wikipedia) will make project documentation easily searchable online, easily understood by the average person, and as easy as possible to act on.

    With each annual IdeaFest happening in a community, prizes are awarded to recognize existing and ongoing projects in numerous categories, with lots of recognition for everyone involved. This annual event can grow into a giant celebration of the city, focusing on how residents are taking their quality of life into their own hands. This event includes an assessment of each project and a report on positive changes since the previous year. This public event will help keep project participants focused on producing good results, will rightly celebrate their efforts and will inspire others to do likewise by presenting role models. Imagine the effect on young people of seeing civic activism so celebrated year after year, and of having such opportunities to engage in meaningful projects, with all the learning that would ensue.

    The TED Global Cities 2.0 website is the local/global crossroads for all this activity. Any qualified community group or government can use the turnkey, cloud-based system to put on its own IdeaFest at minimal or no cost, removing two gigantic barriers (design and cost). The organizational support and confidence provided by using a proven system (well, when it is proven) greatly reduces another barrier.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 5 of 9

    Positive advantages include integrated access to resources such as the library of past projects, the evolving state-of-the-art “manuals” for each kind of project based on cumulative experience, online tracking and reporting, global visibility for local projects, the ability to contribute to the growing knowledge-base, access to distant support, and global networking with expert advisors and others engaged in similar projects. If major technical, organizational or other roadblocks appear, particularly repeatedly, they can be presented as challenges to the world’s problem-solvers and attract the best and most creative minds to develop solutions.

    Ongoing and past projects and proposals, including status tracking and results, are searchable by region, community name and subject matter. This is the Wikipedia-like part, with the differences being it is action oriented and its organizing question is “What makes cities and towns work better?” rather than “What do we know?”

    Theory (part 1 of 7): There’s a theory behind this whole approach which is useful to understand at this point. The theory is that shared questions are a fundamental mechanism of collective intelligence. Shared questions allow people to think together. Significant shared questions can elicit ongoing, deep engagement. For example, “What is something that would make (our city or town) better?” is a shared question, meaning any number of people (particularly those in that community and familiar with its needs and resources) can hold that question in mind and contribute ideas, experience, and other resources toward answering the question. “What makes cities and towns work better?” is another shared question at a higher level of generalization useful for a compendium such as a Wikipedia-style reference.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 6 of 9

    Theory (part 2 of 7): The collective contributions can be assessed as objectively as possible to produce the best available working answer or collection of working answers. Those working answers can improve over time by continuing to ask the question and find continually better solutions.

    Theory (part 3 of 7): Shared questions work from the ephemeral, such as “Where shall we go for lunch?” to the essentially immortal (so long as there are interested intelligent beings) such as the organizing question of science, “How does nature work?” In light of this question-centric model, science can be understood as an extended and evolving set of working answers to the question “How does nature work?”

    Theory (part 4 of 7): Because such large, organizing questions can have any number of subquestions, a question-based knowledge model has infinite room to grow. Examples of subquestions include “Why are plants green?” “What causes tides?” and “What are those bright things in the sky at night?” Subquestions in turn can have any number of their own subquestions, to as many levels as desired. No matter how large or complex such a system gets, every piece is always directly and logically traceable to the original organizing question. Each piece is either a logical subquestion or part of the collection of working answers, including the search for better ones.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 7 of 9

    Theory (part 5 of 7): We humans use shared questions all the time (for instance, organizations can be seen as answers to questions, which leads to some interesting possibilities) but mostly we do not recognize the full process. Used consciously, as in this city-based system being proposed, the approach systematically produces continually improving results over time because people do not get stuck on answers, which tend to result in a status quo attitude (“This is how we do it”).

    Theory (part 6 of 7): Instead, continually asking the question allows answers to evolve as things change, which they may be relied upon to do. Changing resources, numbers, technology, experience, opportunities, insights, discoveries, alliances, needs, legal environments, etc. might indicate a new or altered approach would be a better answer. Because the dedication is to answering the question in the best possible way rather than to any particular answer, adaptive change comes far more easily with this approach.

    Theory (part 7 of 7): Further, a question-based system of collective intelligence can evolve its collection of subquestions and working answers limitlessly over any time span, as science has and continues to do. A new area of inquiry can be opened simply by asking a new subquestion. The organizing question also acts as a screen, selecting for and admitting better answers as they are validated and demoting less good ones to the status of false or inadequate. The entire system continually optimizes for the results stated in the question, whether that is a growing understanding of how nature works or, as in this case, growing knowledge, skills, resources and actuality of creating better communities. As with open source software (and the question-based approach is a model for how open source works as well), much input from wide participation means rapid evolution. End of theory section.
  • Dec 20 2011: Section 8 of 9

    Consequences of the IdeaFest process: One overall outcome of the IdeaFest process is a growing and evolving library and collaboration space, rich with experience-based possibilities, resources and networking. Communities, groups and individuals anywhere can draw upon this for their own projects even if they don’t mount a full IdeaFest, so it is a collection and distribution system of the best ideas from everywhere.

    Building on that function, outstanding ideas and ways to implement them in each useful area can be identified and spotlighted to encourage their rapid and wide dissemination. For example, the “liter of light” (a clever way of bringing light into dark slum dwellings that requires no electricity and very low cost) would be a candidate for this treatment (http://youtu.be/o-Fpsw_yYPg ).

    As the IdeaFest recurs annually, results build in each participating community and worldwide. Larger numbers of people become involved in a growing number of projects aimed at making each participating community better. Tracking the impact would become very impressive very soon, and be a good mechanism for attracting sponsors and still more participating cities and individuals.
  • Dec 20 2011: I like Tom Ponessa’s contribution below (or above…) and so many of the other thoughts on cities.

    One direction I’d be interested in seeing the TED folks explore would involve using these social and ecological perspectives to develop principles for adaptive management, approaching “city 2.0” not as a discrete artifact or end goal, but more as processes of urbanization unfolding and interacting across varied natural and cultural landscapes.

    Of course, amazing people, communities, and institutions have been addressing various facets of cities. How can TED harness the diversity of its community to work on these challenges and mutually support the multitude of local experiments? Perhaps there is some role for the network of TED communities and urban residents across the globe to assist with sourcing, comparing, and “ground truthing” various initiatives -- under the wide array of local conditions -- to investigate what and how particular activities can scale up, and also expand the menu of urban development/transition philosophies and potential solutions.

    I’d add that these approaches might include how decision makers can better confront conditions that change rapidly and in unpredictable ways at various scales. This might include ways to
    *loosen up formal processes into more flexible principles that acknowledge the informal nature of much urban land use
    *nurture places/neighborhoods that help people of all ages and backgrounds thrive (leave no neighborhood behind)
    *facilitate regional urban processes that respect, protect, and incorporate natural landscape systems that support wildlife habitat and robust ecosystems
    *make cities part of “reconciliation ecology” and healing places
    *encourage resource and community relationships that enhance capacity to cope with variation and shocks (food, weather, population shifts, etc.)
  • Dec 19 2011: To have a balance between socioeconomic status and access to amenities and resources (i.e. public libraries, parks and healthy food). The quality of where you live is inextricably tied to how much money you have. In City 2.0, wealth and income will not dictate the natural and social landscape of where people live. Visit http://www.wishproject.me to contribute a wish that has been lingering in your psyche and subconsciously or consciously influences or controls your life. Wishproject is an interactive data visualization project that explores our wishes, why we make them and how they affect our lives.
  • thumb
    Dec 19 2011: To help people visualize the complexities of NYC’s urban environment as it progressed toward sustainability, I created the first Green Map in 1992. This sparked a mapmaking movement that has spread to 60 countries, generating a globally designed iconography and thousands of local gatherings. Today there are hundreds of printed Green Maps and nearly 20,000 green living, ecological and cultural sites on our nonprofit’s social mapping platform at http://GreenMap.org.

    Interacting with information is central to City 2.0. I wish we could co-create an engaging marker system so the relevant features of each 2.0 site will become public knowledge. Adaptable for buildings, infrastructure, public space, routes and districts, these markers would include a QR or other link to collect responses and highlight nearby/similar initiatives and relevant events. Co-created in an open studio, a range of new Green Maps, mobile apps and data visualization resources would be developed to assure social inclusion in all aspects of the vibrant City 2.0.
  • Dec 19 2011: My wish is that the TED Prize promote the message of community. You are a member of a community, realize it, embrace it, and act like it. I would like for the prize to educate the members of the City 1.0 on how their decisions, actions, and involvement (or lack thereof), affect their city.

    If members of a community truly believe, "We're all in this together", the natural progression is one that is sustainable ecologically, financially, and socially.

    Without going into the details in this post, I feel we already have the knowledge and technology to move in this direction, but lack the will at a scale that makes it happen.
  • Dec 19 2011: Disseminating the benefits of privately-funded, property-assessed renewable energy programs to existing financial institutions would enable clean energy investments anywhere in the world where property taxes are collected. This is an actionable goal which is scalable now, and requires a minimum amount of funding to have an immediate impact on the global transition to low-carbon economies. For a brief summary of this proposal, check out the work of the Renewable & Appropriate Energy Laboratory's (University of California - Berkeley): http://rael.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/2011_RAEL_PACESummary.pdf
    More information is also available here: http://rael.berkeley.edu/financing
  • Dec 18 2011: (CONTINUED FROM POST #2)

    So here’s the conclusion, we can provide TED community with a quiz which can simply tell which segment a person stands, and a specific and useful method for TED audience to help each other to learn TEDTalks, we already suggested some students to put into practice, and turns out that it really works. All details are in our videos, please, please, please, watch them in an unusual way- watch them over and over, again and again(especially when a Chinese try to show idea in English, big challenge). And we are now preparing our third video, which is about an even faster way for people to truly learn TEDTalks, we’ll post it when it’s done.

    We believe no matter which segment a person stands, everyone can become the ones who play the game through this method! That’s why we said in the videos: We believe we can change this curve, and we will have more innovators and early adopters to make it a different world, thank you for your patience!
    http://youtu.be/YFAuzx-AP1M
    http://youtu.be/TNZFLzbQEYs
    http://youtu.be/KgkhgQUbg4w
    http://youtu.be/-RGq0k8P7cg

    If you have any question, please contact us, we are looking forward to any opportunity of spreading the ideas.
  • Dec 18 2011: (CONTINUED FROM POST #1)

    There’s still another question: We all knew that videos provide more information than books, there are lot of subconscious messages in videos, but I believe the problem is, the vast majority how their brain operate when they act, they think and they learn, is very different from those 16% people, most people use the outer circle of “Golden Circle” of the “what” level when they learn, and that’s not gonna drive their behavior. Using old habits to learn no matter how wonderful ideas, the ones who watch will still be the ones who watch, this explains why so many ideas had been published, but still lots of people can’t change their lives after they reading those books. If TED can provide audience with more specific and useful method to learn, that might be the only way to achieve, as what I said: shifting people to “Innovators” and “Early adopters” segments, and we will really be able to become “the ones who plays the game” that we hope to all be.
  • Dec 18 2011: Our wish for The City 2.0 is to change the curve of "The law of diffusion of innovation."

    I believe people who had watched: How great leaders inspire action, sure will be familiar with what I say below.
    According to ”The law of diffusion of innovation”, it’s a standard bell curve that is split up into different segments: Innovators, Early adopters, Early Majority, Late Majority, Laggards. Consider there are three types of people in the world:
    Innovators, Early adopters -The ones who play the game
    Early adopters, Early Majority -The ones who watch the game
    Laggards-The ones who have no idea that the game is being played
    (for more details please google: The Law of Diffusion of Innovation)

    The cruel fact is, 84% people in the world can’t truly participate in the game. And it may be a little unacceptable for people that they are not in the rarely 16% group. But I believe what TED celebrated is open those great ideas from those innovators and early adopters, hoping one day that those audience, who learnt enough to contribute their own ideas, which means to shift people to “Innovators” and “Early adopters” segments by learning from TEDTalks. The biggest question is: how people get to know which segment they stand in different points in time?
  • thumb
    Dec 18 2011: A new form of government would need to be designed and the financial gap between the rich and the poor could never be greater than "X".

    You work out the details!
  • Dec 18 2011: To network with projects like this:

    Ariel’s Wood will an offering to those who seek a place for contemplative retreat and a gathering place for those who wish to enrich human experience through a cultivation of common ground in the Arts and Sciences.

    The aim of Ariel’s Wood is to establish a place that is open for people who wish for silent retreat as well as explore creative pursuits in art and science. Ariel’s Wood will be both a playground and nesting place for ideas and experiences that help us connect to one another and seek our deepest human potentials.

    The worlds of Art and Science are opposite sides of the same coin, bound together by the passion for discovery that lights the passage of ages. Ariel’s Wood hopes to create an open exchange of ideas that trace their currency to our most precious ancient cultural traditions as well as look forward to our most innovative humanistic discoveries. Art programs would include coffeehouse series in an intimate and small venue (capacity circa 100), theatrical performances, studio recording & workshops, artist-in-residence opportunities, book and film series, art installations within the main performance hall, music instruction, sacred dance & yoga classes, and workshops in handicraft and folk art. Science programs would include film and lecture series, photographic exhibits, ecology walks, conservation studies, and gardening. The cumulative intent would have Ariel’s Wood network with any and all groups, locally and globally, who are aspirants in the work and play of a ‘verifiable spiritual ecology’ that serves Great Nature. We will assist in sponsoring people and projects in America and around the world who see the need to ‘pay forward’ and create a more habitable and dynamically evolving world. Within the sphere of Ariel’s Wood, the phrase “work in progress,” will become an honorable striving…its work to preserve the idea of life as continuous education and thus fill a need for those who are thirsty seekers
  • Dec 17 2011: This idea should not be about the city but about the people. If the people can not adapt to this city, then the city is useless. I do understand that this idea is focusing primarily on a futuristic, ideal city, but regardless the people should be the main focus for they are the only ones that can build this paradise.

    Thinking about the people, if we use positive promotions on green technology, then the environment should be cleaner by more people using green technology. Then again, these promotions are overlook by the abnormal feel towards green technology and the social norms of using common but not so environmental friendly machines. Moreover, people generally focus on the present environment rather than be worried about the future environment. For example, Tim, a 10 year old at a elementary school, is doodling on a piece of paper. The recess bell rings and he throws the piece of paper into the trash can rather than to the recycling bin, since he is rushing to recess. To clarify, regardless of age, we generally focus on present things that are related to ourselves as individuals rather than future things that are related to ourselves as coherent groups. The only way city 2.0 can better itself is to put green technology as commonplace technology and this can only happen if we teach the people the immediate benefits of green technology and not the delay benefits even if they are better. In other words, we just have to set up conferences, workshops, and interactive websites on the immediate gratification of green technology. Also, we should only promote green technology rather than put down commonplace technology, since the people will only understand the harmful effects of non-environmental friendly technology, but not the benefits of green technology. To sum up, to improve the environment, focus on the people not the city.
  • Dec 16 2011: I imagine a city where every citizen worked free a day for the city, where umemployed people worked for city cleaning , whrere people woluld speak calm, where each quarter would recuperate its beggars.
  • Dec 15 2011: Part #3- A weekly town hall meeting will be called to address City 2.0 issues and objectives. Neighborhood town halls will address request within them and Community groups will be called on to meet a specific need. The need has to be met collaboratively. People with a passion for knitting will form a community and connect with an organization that uses knit goods to bless other people. Citizens will be drawn to and connected by their
    passions and areas of knowledge. Instead of putting on an event to support a cause, City 2.0 will put out a cause and form a Neighborhood to meet it.

    A mirror that reflects Good.
  • Dec 15 2011: Part #2- and can be invited into private forums. This takes the boundaries off of education and creates a thinking and breathing world limited only by the imagination.

    In City 2.0 each aspect of our lives will have a platform where citizens can learn information and how to get involved in organizations within their real cities.

    Companies and organizations will have an opportunity in the Business Center to recruit virtual employees who collaborate on projects giving access to a global employee base, as well as, actual volunteers from their areas.

    City 2.0 Emergency Response System (including the siren) will be able to give real time access to updates and information regarding disasters and relief efforts happening on a global level and City 2.0 citizens will be given the opportunity to mobilize, make donations directly to organizations already equipped to respond and share resources that are available.

    Citizens of City 2.0 will be given the opportunity to meet together in real cities all over the globe during the TED Conferences with a live feed. They will meet in places that have larger seating capacities and up to date sound systems such some public schools and large churches. Registration fees will be donations of food and completed volunteer hours with participating non-profit organizations.

    TEDMinor or TEDJr will be a traveling hands on forum hosted by schools around the world to give children the ability to be innovators and problem solvers and attend a live City 2.0 classroom.

    In the Religious Neighborhood citizens can believe in whatever religion they want in the real world but in City 2.0 the only religion allowed is LOVE. The world will be taught how to feed, clothe, house, and more importantly educate it’s real communities and City 2.0 citizens will help through micro finance and various organizations that empower and awaken the human heart with acts of kindness and generosity.
    Cont....
  • Dec 15 2011: Part #1-It is a mirror city. A virtual city that is inherently connected to the real world. It has a government, school system, library, community center, medical system (e.g. hospital, medical offices, labs etc.) banking system, police department, emergency response team. Each segment of the population will be represented.

    Citizens will have to register and will be organized into neighborhoods of strengths and passions. (www.strengthfinders.com). Each neighborhood will be presented with a real time situation, some great and some small. The citizens of the neighborhood will be given an open forum with a time period and a basic platform to build off of. They must within the required time frame come up with a collaborative solution. Neighborhoods with complementary strengths will be given the opportunity to weigh in on the plan.

    Real world cities and governments will be given the opportunity to register and view the collective solutions and weigh in on the discussion with actual information that could present obstacles, challenges and flaws in the plan etc. No one person in the community will be given the opportunity to complete a real time situation alone.

    Opinions will be kept to a minimum and ideas and solutions will be the agenda. Ten people standing around discussing what they “think” will not save a persons life. Arguments about ideas, positions etc will be classified as “weeds” and will require virtual landscapers, which will patrol the neighborhoods, to quickly extinguish and remove them.

    TED citizens will be able to have a full access library (the web) designed for learning and education, complete with real life tutors and instructors (other citizens). The University system will be on a global level and able to teach degree programs where you learn subject matter for FREE and then take test ( proctored ) to get your degree. TED talks will be a series of lecture halls. Students can earn Certificates of Knowledge on any subject they want.
    Cont....
  • Dec 15 2011: I believe the route to a city 2.0 requires many small steps into an unknowable future. I think that if every little step is guided by a desire to improve the efficiency of urban form then the city will become both sustainable and worth living in.

    If we view the city as a giant communication devise transferring information from person to person, community to community, generation to generation, era to era then we can start to understand the true value of living in a city. The more efficient that transfer of information becomes; that is, the more a city produces, and the less a city consumes and wastes, the more valuable city development becomes.

    If our primary purpose is to improve the efficiency of urban form, then we will be guided towards an improved urban environment each little step of the way.
  • thumb
    Dec 15 2011: I dream of creating an enviornmentally effcient environment that enhances human relationships.
    The architecture, the restrictions on building heigths, and the design of public spaces need to inspire people to personal and communal success.
    Density is important, as is spaciousness. Buidlings need to speak to human scale and to open skies- no more than 8 stories tall. Parks need to encrouage activites and invte private contemplation.
    Our lives are becoming lives of experiences not possessions.
    If our self expressions are lived in the public forum, our communities are physical reflections of the same.
  • Dec 15 2011: My wish is for The Venus Project to become a reality in some U.S. city, wherever there is enough interest from local citizens. The Venus Project, by Jacque Fresco, includes designs for cities of the future -- agriculture, waste treatment, education, healthcare, entertainment, physical infrastructure, housing, transportation, etc. These designs are at http://www.thevenusproject.com; please have a look. Thank you!
  • Dec 15 2011: i agree. if we could educate people about the groups/orientations/races ect that they target, a lot of the hate would disappear. Once you start seeing people as exactly that, people, and encouraging them interact in positive environments, you start seeing some very promising results.
  • Dec 14 2011: I don't know what the City 2.0 will look like. But I hope that it's residents, whilst accepting what is currently and I am sure will continue to be an astounding collection technological media in their world, will rediscover the joy of the mechanical. I hope that they will become enamored with the idea of the bespoke and fine craftsmanship. They will be aware of the satisfaction of building, maintaining and manipulating physical objects for oneself. The touch and feel of material and finish as well as the ease of precision engineered movement will be paramount to their inner feelings of satisfaction and joy. Whats more I hope these residents will collaboratively build the city for themselves, The city will not be built at the discretion of government planners of wealthy developers, it will be built, cared for and maintained by the very communities who occupy it.

    Make it yourself.

    J
  • Dec 14 2011: the City 2 is a multiple urban entity, having many features, forms, or spaces. As a minimum, it's a triplex city:
    http://www.smartconnectedcommunities.org/message/1808#1808

    From technological prospects, its a digital city, cyber city, networked city, or digitally smart city, where NG ICT networks, mobile and ubiquitious and cloud computing, 4G+ wireless networks, augmented virtual reality, sensor networks, software agent technologies, etc. are embedded in the physical urban environment.

    From ecological perspectives, it is a clean city, green city, eco city, or ecologically healthy city, where distributed energy networks, renewable energy sources, green technologies, etc. are embedded in the physical urban space.

    From social prospects, it is an intelligent city, social capital city, knowledge city, innovation city, or creative city, where knowledge-intensive activities, intelligent governance and social networks, meaningful public spaces, and knowledge triangle infrastructure are shaping the social city environment.
  • thumb
    Dec 14 2011: Despite the fact that I always wish schools should be in amusement park where there are art, music, strangers, decision-making (if you want to be time efficient), cost and benefit analysis.... I'd suggest something more serious. There should be a clear information flow, and no fence for classrooms. In city2.0 everyone loves learning and is interested in citizenship. For people who feel like taking a geography class or politics class, they should be as welcomed to walk in a lecture hall as regular students.
  • Dec 14 2011: i wish for city 2.0 to achieve it's goals and create a society free of hate, bias and suffering.
    • Dec 14 2011: Great thinking Sarah! It's my belief that this begins when people can get to know one another. It would be great for City 2.0 to have some type of public space or possibly weekly public meals where people can connect with their neighbors from across the city - with a particular emphasis on bringing in people from very diverse parts of the city.

      All too often, one reads about "Illegal Immigrants", "Muslims", even "Republicans" and "Democrats" without knowing a single person who represents that group. If one has a friend (or friends) in these different groups, I think it's basically impossible to stereotype that group.

      Also, if you've seen in Ethan Zuckerman's and Eli Pariser's talks, it certainly seems like the internet is not helping bridge disparate communities. It would be amazing if City 2.0 could be designed in such a way to facilitate these types of gatherings.
  • thumb
    Dec 14 2011: I wish for City 2.0 to be information rich, geospatial, and shared. Intellegent cities will be more than whizz-bang and expensive smart infrastructure; they will display an emergent intelligence that arises from individual's accessibility to the data that helps them define for themselves the way live and play. In City 2.0 information on the distribution of transportation and green infrastructure and how those contribute to your personal health and resilience will empower citizens to take an active role in developing and maintaining these amenities. Individuals will contribute by both consuming these data and producing their own through casual observations, citizen science, and network development.

    City 2.0 should make available location and other information about the businesses and services (and lack thereof/opportunities) to allow entrepreneurs to fill the voids and create self-organizing neighborhood economic development around providing a full compliment of services available within easy walk/bike/transit distance.
  • Dec 13 2011: ... continued from below.

    Autonomous vehicles will also change the logistics of cities. Trucks doing deliveries will no longer travel our streets. Cargo pods will handle most retailer distribution. Many of the unused underground parking space could be used as distribution centers to transfer cargo from large autonomous cargo transports to cargo pods.

    Parking floors usually have low clearance and private ones poor ventilation so, basically, they are inhabitable. Some could be used as gray water tanks and/or water treatment plants. Such water, currently discarded, could be treated to be good enough to flush toilets and water vegetation. Buildings would have to have dual plumbing, one for drinking water the other for second-hand water and dual sewers, one to collect water to be immediately recycled (shower, toilet sink) and the second for water that needs harsher treatment (toilet discharge, kitchen sink, dishwasher).

    Power storage could be another use for that space. Electrical companies would be happy to distribute batteries to help with power distribution. Anyhow, I'm sure that with such a stock of real state being freed, the markets would eventually find a use for it.

    On a completely separate line, I believe condominiums should not exist. Apartment buildings should be owned by a single entity and its apartments rented. Besides the economic problems the housing bubble produced that we now see and suffer would be reduced, society would become more mobile. We are more mobile in most aspects. Less and less of us remain in one place for all our lives, even when married with children and anchored to a school district, large numbers divorce and move elsewhere. Avoiding splitting a building amongst many individual owners will make it easy to renew our cities. Real state companies will have the capital to upgrade buildings with all the features that can make them more attractive to live in and rent.
  • Dec 13 2011: My City 2.0 is the one I currently live in. No "city of the future" will make any sense unless it is based on existing cities. Check, if you will, pictures of Sitges, Spain or nearby metropolis Barcelona. Would you abandon any of those for some eco-dream? My city of the future is an upgraded version of current cities simply because nobody is going to abandon Paris or Istambul. The very idea of moving any significant number of current city dwellers to new cities is in itself ecologically unsound.

    Some of the images on The Venus Project home page looks so much like Walt Disney's original concept for EPCOT that it only adds to my admiration for Disney, all the site looks like Futureland with current rendering techniques, it even shows a monorail, a system which keeps proving unpractical, the Disney guys would gladly shut theirs down were it not for the strong association with the park image (they build none in Paris or Hong Kong).

    Autonomous vehicles will be the biggest change in our cities. Pods like those in Heathrow Terminal 5, but with greater ground clearance to let them run in current streets will complement current mass transit options such as subway and train lines, plus equally autonomous buses. Smart phones (personal assistants or whatever we get to call them) will help us plan our trip. A list of alternatives will give us options from walking or biking on public bikes (free), renting power-assisted bikes (cheapest), mass transit with waling to and from the closest station (cheap), mix of pod and mass transit or purely personal pod (most expensive). The system might offer sharing the pod, thus reducing the price of the trip.

    This would free up a lot of space currently assigned to roads but also lots of parking space. Cities will have to deal with what to do with so many underground parking spaces. Some will be used to park pods off rush hour.
    • thumb
      Dec 13 2011: I absolutely agree with you Daniel...let's build from where we are and move forward. By the way has anyone calculated the carbon footprint for trashing things we already have in place that are working, and could be improved with creativity and critical thinking?
      We also need to work on the principles with which we want to move forward. During the Toronto municipal elections in 2010 I crafted 12 visions for the new GTA--known as the Greater Toronto Area--into the Greatest Toronto Area. With something like this in place, we then look at re-structuring for the greatest cities everywhere.
      Here is the link to my blog on the subject:
      http://blog.torontoelectionsandbox.com/
  • Dec 13 2011: The city 2.0 is currently emerging as an intelligent eco city. Here are some key features of future cities sitting on the smart urban management platform:
    1. Environmental Infrastructure: sustainable land use, effective water supply systems, waste disposal facilities/treatment systems, pollution control systems and services
    2. Intelligent Traffic Infrastructure, Networks, Facilities, Systems and Services
    3. Intelligent Optical ICT Infrastructure, Networks, Systems and Services
    4. Energy Networks of Renewable Resources built in the Smart City Eco Estates and Green Buildings
    5. Social Infrastructure (Smart Health Triangle, Knowledge Triangle, i-Government services, etc.)
    http://www.eis.com.cy
  • thumb
    Dec 13 2011: My wish is for strong neighborhood connections. I wish for neighborhood centers that support and connect neighbors. Neighborhoods are the building blocks of cities.
  • thumb
    Dec 13 2011: By good leadership we can take Lee Kuan Yew who was the first prime minister of Singapore. Read more about him here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew and this book about him >> http://www.amazon.com/Lee-Kuan-Yew-Man-Ideas/dp/9812040498

    Here in the middle east, the leader either makes or breaks the country, sadly. That is why I may conclude that a good leader and a good plan is what it takes to make city 2.0
  • thumb
    Dec 13 2011: First of all if we manage to make City 2.0 a city for millions -and maybe even more- then that in itself would be a great first step. By 'a city' we mean no borders, we mean one currency, we mean open trade by any 2 bodies within this city. A city for everyone, that supports and even needs diversity to function well. A city that has good urban planning, a functional system of public transportation, a good (and preferably free) education.

    Most importantly maybe is good leadership and a good plan. Leadership that is free from corruption and personal interest. We seem to be unable to maintain the cities we have and that is not because we are 'unable' as citizens or as thinkers or workers but because some communities are used to the corruption within the systems and states and thus stand in the face of taking our cities to the next step of being welcoming and good environments for our generation and those to come.
  • Dec 13 2011: I am a youth! Listen to the next generation!
    Use both the right and left side of the brain when building the city. This essentially derives from the isle the I Qin McGilchrist proposed which states that our sociey is using the left brain too muc and not enough of the right. Since the left brain is detached, logical, and focuses on the manipulation of everything it sees which makes us see the world as an object to be exploited and diced up into pieces for our wants and needs! The right sees evert as a connected whole and co-exists win it and appriexiates it's beauty. Our use of capitalism today is quite left brained and destructive to both the world and ourselves. By using a combination of both the left and the right sides of the brain we can become a whole brained society. What I'm basically trying to say here is make a city the applies to both the qualities of the left and the right sides of the brain, for it will definitely make a beautiful city! (check out Iain McGilchrist for more info)
    Make it beautiful nd breathtaking like something out of a fantasy novel.
    Allways remember to promote the arts and literature, for these make up the blood of culture.
    Cooperate with mother earth don't war with her.
    Get Martin Conboy Lighting Design in on this, it's the best lighting business in Canada (truly).
    Good luck, all of us will support you until the end!
  • thumb
    Dec 13 2011: I think it would be great to move some parts of education back to apprentice/intern style things. I recently went to two pretty big corporations headquarters and saw that they had all kinds of facilities for their employees including day cares. It seemed to me that if people brought their children to work, and the different people that work there could all rotate on teaching various courses, the kids would have access to bigger ideas much sooner than they otherwise would have.

    A child with an interest in computer science could go to school at a place like intel or google. I cannot imagine what it would be like to go to school in a place like that, what ideas could those children come up with if they were being taught by that kind of talent? Obviously there would be details to sort out to flesh the idea some, but still, wouldn't we expect some pretty remarkable things?
  • Dec 13 2011: Truly effective mass transportation
  • Dec 12 2011: You can't apply this method to existing cites. This method will include technologies that do not exist in current cities, the layout will be intelligence and geometry applied to society and function. It is far more practical within the perspective of 100 years to build a completely new city, land will become more arable in this process, architecture will be up-to-date, and automation will increase the rate of construction so dramatically that existing cities will be phased out by technological advancement. Think of an army of just 10,000 robotics that are designed to erect cities, that are programed to run as a single building unit (compare it to the Toyota car assembly line), the work/time equation will equal the greatest progression rates we've ever seen on earth.

    In a metaphorical sense, to help you understand. Our current cities resemble the Caterpillar. Automating cities will be like building the cocoon, and settling in them will be like taking on the wings of a butterfly. If we attempt automation now, within 100 years we will be perfecting the process and building brand new cities from scratch all the time, until we expand on to the sea and out into space.
    • Dec 17 2011: we cannot sustain constant expansion and casting aside the old in favour of the new. we must learn to work with our past in order to generate the future - we can't just build over everything. despite your animal analogies, it seems you are forgetting nature - the need for wilderness - and the fact that we are not the only sentient beings inhabiting planet earth.
      the world has its own intelligence and geometry and our foremost goal must surely be working to bring ourselves into harmony with that and minimising the space we consume rather than 'expanding out onto the sea and out into space'...
      • Dec 19 2011: My understanding of nature is that the earth is a finite globe with a decaying atmosphere due to gravitational effect along with many in-house related environmental issues. most organic regions are found in mainly sea-level sunlight oriented areas and thrive with life. Organs regenerate, plants re-sprout, and sediment, nutrients and other forms of fertile move along the earth as a crust or skin transferring as the way of erosion by wind, fire, water, and earth. We as a society need materials, and we can either grow them, farm them, or the are finite mined ore. We can create abundance most effectively in the most abundantly organic--in-nature regions on the globe.. where are those regions? They are located in current mainstream city's along costs, or deltas, or rivers... The most efficent aproach to the future is to build our society around modern potential, constantly allowing for upgradable applications instead of century old patch work on crucial foundations, and restoration of old buildings. I get it, there is some value to history, but all that money spend on restoration could build City 2.0

        but eventually yes, I do see humans expanding civilian-life to mega sea-city structures off shore all together - basically a cruise ship that replenishes supplies itself instead of making pit stops on land
  • Dec 12 2011: There will no particular rank on that city that means all members are equally determined.
  • Dec 12 2011: The City of the future goes as an intelligent city, a kind of smart sustainable community.
    The Development Strategy of City 2.0, as an intelligent eco city, has been recently keynoted on the CIT 2011 (the 11th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology): http://www.cs.ucy.ac.cy/CIT2011/index.php?p=Keynotes.
    The TED promotion of the i-ecocity could be a contribution into creating the World 2.0 (Smart World); download the Smart World Manifesto from the Smart Connected Communities Institute site:
    http://www.smartconnectedcommunities.org/message/2036#2036
  • Dec 12 2011: Through Education. To Make a difference.
  • thumb
    Dec 12 2011: I'd wish that it had a name that didn't reek quite so much of digital technology nomenclature..

    ..maybe a little more poetic.

    Nutopia has been suggested in the past.. "imagine no possessions.."
  • Dec 12 2011: Pt.2
    Recycling programs need to more automated, allowing for everything that is recyclable (which should be as many things as possible) to be recycled without any sort of inconvenience for the end user. Tubes or other methods of automatically transporting waste and recyclables should be implemented into the infrastructure of ALL building and public places.

    Equality in society, money, living conditions, food, should be a basic human right. No one should be without a place to live, food to eat, a say in what changes are made in their community, and no one should be able to restrict others and their ability to advance in life.

    Accurate information should be easily found and as easy to understand as can be. Possibly make a new type of location where “facts” are listed and concrete (Peer reviewed wikipedia. Changes should only be able to be made after a majority vote has agreed that something is wrong or outdated.

    More farms and more locally grow food should be produced. Rewards and status should be given to those who work hard in keeping the food production clean, healthy, and local. Mass produced food should be used less and gardens and local farms should be used more.

    Government and laws should be put into much plainer terms and should be 100% transparent and accessible. No one should be able to “buy” a government officials vote, and no ONE person or company should have more say in the government or law making process than anyone else. A true democracy where everyone votes on issues. (ex. Everybody Votes for the Nintendo Wii)

    Peace. No War. For No Reason. It wastes lives and resources. There is always another way of solving problems. Possibly have a large military force which can maintain peace but they would also need to be 100% accountable/transparent and have people who oversee their actions so that no deception or “black ops” can be performed. People need to watch the people watching the military, and society needs to watch them all.
  • Dec 12 2011: Coincidentally, there is a Detroit revitalization design challenge running over at OpenIdeo that could furnish a lot of inspiration:
    http://www.openideo.com/open/vibrant-cities/concepting/

    And another excellent resource is the Design with the Other 90%: CITIES exhibition at the UN:
    http://designother90.org/cities/home
  • Dec 11 2011: If we look at the Scandinavians and Holland for advice and inspiration, I think we'll all be OK. Design & sustainability were taken far more seriously there before the rest of the world jumped on the eco-society bandwagon. Also education and social welfare is second to none.

    If we are talking about a City 2.0 that will accommodate 10 billion people, I think the biggest problem we face is not choosing what's going to go in the City, rather how all the nations are going to agree on one system. Each one will prioritise something another completely disagrees on.

    Just a thought.
  • thumb
    Dec 11 2011: Can we build City 2.0 like nature built its forests? Our buildings shaped like mushrooms and/or acorns? That City 2.0 blends into nature instead of being a jungle of concrete.
  • Dec 11 2011: To make a difference.
  • thumb
    Dec 10 2011: Let's collaborate and figure out how to provide for all peoples, energy needs that are sustainable. For example, fracking is not sustainable, if it pollutes the water table and destroys lives. A few days ago, the EPA finally implicated fracking. The consciousness around this issue is slowly rising, but not fast enough. We have the answers. It won't be easy. Connect the profits from an energy form that proves unsustainable and destructive to fines. By that I mean write into the laws that a large percentage of the profits would need to be put into a fund that would not be touched, and would benefit no one, until it was determined that the energy form was sustainable. This could be a graduated form of profit holding. A rethinking and rewriting of the laws surrounding energy needs is a start.
  • thumb
    Dec 10 2011: Before thinking of doing something for the cities we firstly need to know the current situation and the planned future, but, do we really have enough information about the present and the (so far planned and drawn) future of the cities? Mostly the answer is no. We don’t have the least idea about what is cooking out there on the tables of planning authorities of the cities for the future. Then how are we at all going to participate?

    In an ideal situation the urban planning decision makers are supposed to be a team of planners, urban designers, architects, engineers, environmentalists, sociologists, relevant other multidisciplinary professionals involving public opinions. In typical cases, most of the major urban planning decisions are made and/or manipulated by the politicians and negotiators of real-estates and corporates to benefit themselves. Generally this is how the future of our cities is written.

    But these are serious decisions that have direct impact on our daily life and also on our children in a long run. We surely need transparency, openness and opportunity of participation in making these decisions. Firstly we HAVE the basic RIGHT of access to urban planning/design decisions before they get done. It’s not a privilege I am asking it is a very valid right of every citizen. We need full access to all sorts of planning data, drawings, and maps, everything that have been drawn. We clearly need a more democratic and transparent way of urban planning and policy making, involving ‘real’ public and multidisciplinary professionals.

    My wish: Firstly spreading this voice “Accessibility to urban planning information is a basic right of citizens”, and to ensure it by making an open platform that will host all the available information and resources we have of the present and the future about cities. Eventually the crowd-sourced multidisciplinary participation of identifying the planning problems and proposing design and strategic solutions will come up naturally.
  • thumb
    Dec 10 2011: My wish for City 2.0 is that the education system is completely revamped, restructured, re-imagined to become a collaborative creative experience that builds on what was and what is, so we can work together on what can be. It rewards "connecting the dots" much more than memorizing dates. It integrates different perspectives from all cultures and age groups because you never know when or where the next great idea is going to come from, or who will inspire it. It shares the responsibility of teaching between "school" and "home". It blurs the lines between teacher and student, since both have something to teach and both have something to learn. It helps us to become heros, ala Zimbardo's Heroic Imagination Project. http://blog.ted.com/2011/02/03/phil-zimbardo-and-the-heroic-imagination-project-ted-blog-exclusive-video/. It never ends, carrying on our entire lives as a function of how businesses operate, innovate and nurture their employees. And it's fun, because life should be fun.
    • Dec 10 2011: the venus project, resource based economy.
      we have to realize and admit that monetaryism is outdated and obsolete, stop trying to sacrofice efciciency, abundance and sustainability for econmoc gain and so called opertunity.


      watch zeitgeist moving forward: zeitgeistmovingforward.com
  • Dec 10 2011: "Utopian" That tells us nothing about how to solve problems, talk about utopias is that it has been the best we can in some way, and that's impossible, you can only have the best cell developed to date, but not the best phone of all time. The Venus Project is not the best, nor perfect. The only thing that the venus project says is that if you apply the scientific method to social progress and all aspects of human life, you will reduce the likelihood of poverty, war, suffering, pollution, etc. to almost zero. I repeat, is not the best system, just something better than what we have now, and is not something static or established, is something that is constantly evolving. Jacque Fresco's cities are not the best cities, he says "my cities for people in the future could be a straitjacket, they will be educated to question and update everything, not to perpetuate a system in place" But it's something that is currently possible, Jacque circular cities so far have shown (for me) to be the most efficient, sustainable and humane. A resource-based economy is the way to be a type one civilization (global) monetary system can be stimulated in some respects to human, but has also perpetuated poverty, social stratification, exploitation, corruption, the shortage, the wars, aberrant behavior, planned obsolescence (and do not tell me that's good, because the fact that your printer is programmed to have a limited number of copies or things to be designed to be more fragile and brittle is not a sign of development or efficiency at all). Nor say it is human nature (as if they had studied human behavior for decades) If you make people have access to all needs and are not stressed to pay food, electricity, taxes, education of their children, and above are exploited at work, etc. then people start behaving differently, because there would be no basis for disruptive behavior.
  • Dec 10 2011: My wish is that City 2.0 emphasizes Cities as Food Energy Water Zones of Innovation as a way to learn to live in greater Harmony with the Earth and each other.

    "You can't understand sustainability until you understand the Food-Energy-Water Nexus."-Warren Ault

    At the epicenter of that nexus is Vertical Farming (or high density Controlled Environment Agriculture) which is fundamentally an issue of Land Economics. As an emerging Alternative Asset Class of Real Estate, it offers to consume 90% less water, while a not insignificant amount of more electricity. If powered renew-ably through waste to energy solutions, the nexus relationships become symbiotic, improving economic opportunity and innovation in each category, while driving multiple industries. It accomplishes what City 2.0 promotes.


    “Johann von Thünen: often cited as one of the first regional economists. His Isolated State (1826) sought to explain agricultural locations in Germany and became the first serious attempt to incorporate the spatial element in pragmatic economic thought. Von Thünen assumed a central town as the sole market center, surrounded by a flat featureless homogeneous plain with no transportation advantages (save distance) and of equal fertility. The wilderness as the edge of this market area could be cultivated if necessary and farmers tried to maximize profits in the context of a given demand and fixed coefficients (costs) of production. These assumptions (which clearly are never met in real-life situations) led to an explanation of land use by a rent gradient that put high-intensity crops (density of yield per acre) near the center along with higher-priced crops and crops necessitating heavier transportation costs. His work first gave expression to what has become the highest-and-best-use principle-that land use will be economically determined in the marketplace by the ability of user groups to pay rent for the land.” Charles Wurtzebach • Mike Miles, Modern Real Estate, 3rd Edition 87'
  • Dec 10 2011: I am affraid such projects as city 2.0 are spam/scam like projects and don't judge me yet, hold on. Today's people are so caugh in their own environment that htey cannot take sane decissions even when they intend good. Families, marriage, kids, job, friends, anturage, vested interrests, obedience to present autorities, etc...when tey will try to conceive such world they will project things they know and will not be radical just because are so caugh with their direct environment.

    To give you an example, non of the scientific discoveries couldn't be achieved if such people will took decissions. We are all feral children if not science. So, for this to be at it's best quality, take a bunch of scientists from around the world and ask them how they will colonise a planet similar with earth for human beings using only the scientific method. What they would do ?
  • Dec 9 2011: City 2.0 is about efficiency. We can’t continue to push more and more people into the crowded streets and hope for a smoother, more efficient city experience. Let’s change this. Let’s build our cities in a new 3D structure. When space is limited, we’re already doing this. However, the fact remains these subterranean and elevated structures were reactive approaches. City 2.0 is proactive. Subways, tunnels, heavy commercial, parking, and the like could be underground. The daily bustle, light commuter vehicles, would be on the ground level. Rooftops would be the new outdoor markets, restaurants, meeting rooms, etc.. Instead of relegating rooftops to AC units, ventilation systems, and high EMF devices, those areas would be where we all gather for time in the sun among hanging gardens and 7th story Starbucks cafes. Imagine having a morning café meeting with the open sky all around you, glassed in or not. Imagine carrying on all your daily activities a few levels above the ground enjoying the outdoors with no diesel fumes or loud noises. We’re already being pressed in this direction. City 2.0 will be a planned multilevel cityscape. Instead of going down the elevator to lunch you’d just as likely push the up button for the skyway level. Your business or workplace may have a designation of 2862 Eastman Blvd 1, 2, 3, or… higher. Likewise, level 1 may designated the prime level, where basements, car parking garages, subways, heavy commercial business, and utility access exists. Level 2 would be the ground level, or the level in the elevators that gets the star next to it. Ultra-light electric vehicle and bicycle commuter lanes may be a story or two above ground where emissions are nearly zero.

    Starting to get the picture? The whole idea is that we bring everything we need closer together in an up/down sort of way instead of the traditional lateral travel distances. This can be done. We have the technology. Our ambitions aren’t focused.
  • Dec 9 2011: The blurb from Amy Novogratz is good: "The City 2.0 is not a sterile utopian dream, but a real-world upgrade tapping into humanity's collective wisdom." Along with other good things, it has beauty and will lower our carbon footprint. It sounds like it's more within the social meaning of 2.0 than the design world's emphasis on change and innovation.

    Cities have always evolved. As another architect and urban designer commenting. I will point out that streets, squares, blocks and parks have worked well for millennia. Those places, the spaces between the buildings, are where our public interaction takes place. Sometimes someone like Napoleon III and Baron Haussmann come along and plow new boulevards through the fabric, but those boulevards were based on earlier Parisian boulevards: their systematic application was innovative, not their form.

    Only 75 years later Corbusier proposed ripping out a lot of central Paris and building towers in parks next to highways. Paris wisely ignored the plan, but when we followed the the model in the United States, Jane Jacobs called it "urban removal."

    The forces of global capitalism are now going around the world to every city where Goldman Sachs would like to land its jets and telling the city fathers that if they want to compete in the 21st century they need Class A glass office towers, preferably designed by Starchitects (the Starchitects help sell bigger and taller towers by bringing some international glamour to the process). A number of people in New York are telling us we should be Hong Kong or Houston on the Hudson, but most New Yorkers could hardly disagree more.

    I hope that City 2.0 will be more genuinely innovative than glass towers in parks or parking lots. Good city infrastructure resembles New York's loft buildings in the sense that over time it accommodates many different uses. Buildings that have housed workshops, factories, classrooms, offices and storage spaces, are now housing the 1%. That too will change.
  • thumb
    Dec 9 2011: My one wish would be the ability to get in and out very quickly because I do NOT want to live there. I would hate to lose my rural existence. The uncluttered view of the Taos mountains from my bedroom window would be hard to live without.
  • thumb
    Dec 9 2011: A wish on behalf of The City 2.0? Whew, where to begin!! Naturally there are so many desires and ideas. I believe from a macro view, to begin with building consensus on values for such a community. I would like to see as one of those core values an integration with our environment. Everyone truly desires clean air, clean water, clean land. So architect and design for fossil fuel free energy and sustainability. This is obvious undoubtedly. Even more fundamental perhaps is harmonious integration with wildlife habitat within and without The City 2.0. For example, wildlife corridors and protected zones, with buffering integrations zones. I would always include a core community value towards Education, and in this specific example, I believe we have many myths about our co-relationship with wildlife to dispel through Education and community building.
  • Dec 9 2011: I'm an architect and urban designer specializing in renewable energy, so this comment may seem off-base, but I think we should invest the Ted Prize for The City 2.0 in fashion research.

    Here's why: the built environment (infrastructure and buildings especially) the formal foundations of our cities account for a huge portion of global energy consumption. Yet, the artificial climate controls we've created (which consume so much of this energy and contribute to global green house gas emissions) are not sufficient to keep dwellers comfortable. If we explore controlling our physical environment (temperature especially) at the scale of the individual person, through new forms of clothing utilizing the best of nano technologies, micro energy generation, textile experimentation, sociological research, design and fashion, we can largely liberate the physical environment of our cities from the constraints of environmental controls. How amazing could our cities and urban spaces be if we didn't have to climate-control them? How fantastically quickly could we adapt to the new challenges climate change presents if we generate energy at a micro scale? What new forms of interaction could be created in our urban populace? What would the design of City 2.0 look like if we didn't have to rely on our buildings to control our environment; if our outfit could serve that purpose. Therefore, I believe the TED Prize for City 2.0 should go toward the development of environmental controls at the scale of the individual.
  • thumb
    Dec 9 2011: Lots of conversations about Venus project. Nothing wrong with it, however, we need to come up with a realistic approach. Changing political, social, economic, and spiritual systems, all in one go, is utopian at best.

    My suggestion earlier to set a realistic vision of "A large majority of Human Population living in socially vibrant, culturally diverse, economically prosperous and environmentally sustainable 350 high-density cities by the year 2062" is achievable and does not expect to change everything.

    My wish is that we almost double the current population density in large cities, systematically, in a sustainable way and reduce our population footprint worldwide, using all the current technologies and advancing them even further in housing, transportation, agriculture and energy production. My hope is that we will not develop brand new cities but rather transform existing cities.

    Just to give you an idea, current largest city is 20 million people strong and average population density of top 10 cities is little below 35,000 people per square kilometre. Taking a city to 25 million and 60,000 per square kilometre is not far off from reality.
    • Dec 10 2011: Ok. Saying that venus project is utopian, you mean from your perspective? Isn't the technology and scientific knowledge capable? Or that people won't accept such a change? If it is the last one, then did you analyze the human behavior?did you worked with people to see how and what can change them?

      I think a utopia si this monetary system and a fantasy to try to patch it when it is the source of all major problems.

      To change and update the current cities is even more expensive in terms of materials and energy consumption. The currents cities are not cities actually, just some bunch of individual buildings.
    • thumb
      Dec 10 2011: The Venus Project is realistic.
  • Dec 8 2011: I wish for a city with integrated green spaces that are highly maintained so that people feel safe and comfortable using them. The value of the mental health they would nurture, the re-integration of quality of life into the average workday - thereby increasing productivity and likely decreasing the number of sick days taken - justifies the expense.

    I'd like to see greenways between road traffic and buildings be more like 10 yards rather than 10 inches so that trees and grass could provide an energetic buffer and more beauty to the day. Sidewalks right next to the road has always been an insane convention that I've never understood. Practicality over comfort and safety? Whose idea was that?!

    I'd like to see more beauty, period - more creative architecture, more simple landscaping, more open spaces for people to sit - for no other reason than the appreciation of beauty for beauty's sake. Everyone will be happier for it.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: The City 2.0 needs to be designed to maximize the movement of people, not cars. Zoning laws should allow us to adopt healthy lifestyles. It must be safe again for children to walk or ride their bikes to school. Fast food restaurants should not cluster around schools, and all neighborhoods should have access to fresh fruits and vegetables.
  • Dec 8 2011: Hi Amy - I'm with you...no one holds the key...we all do...but since kids are usually left out of the heavy (and fun) lifting...I offer this: Boy discovers microbe that eats plastic
    PhDs have been searching for a solution to the plastic waste problem, and this 16-year-old finds the answer.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: I have been developing a future city design for the past 25 years based on the sacred geometry of the New Jerusalem or Heavenly City as written about by John Michel in "Dimensions of Paradise" and Paolo Soleri's concept of Arcology. A very basic description is posted on this website:

    http://12spiralcity.blogspot.com/

    There is a lot of room for collaboration in the development and realization of this project, so hope that this will inspire people in the possibility of realizing a new city from the ground up that incorporates all of the principles of sacred harmony and leaves out all of the detrimental aspects of our current form of habitation.
  • Dec 8 2011: My future city would be one where I could easily walk or ride public transportation to any location without undue delay or difficulty.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: My hope for City 2.0 is one of complete accessibility for everyone. Those who face with world with either a physical or sensory disability, or multiple disabilities, need to be able to easily navigate their cities and local communities to be equal participants in society. Care and consideration must be taken when designing city public spaces. Public buildings such as libraries, airports, train and bus stations, museums, schools, hospitals, sports and recreational facilities all need to be built with universal design concepts so that all citizens may use and enjoy these spaces. City 2.0 is an inclusive place where all men, women and children who make up society can be seen, heard and their contributions valued. This is my wish for City 2.0
  • Dec 8 2011: Live in houses made up of living trees, where water absorbed form the soil can be used to cool us inside.
    There is fresh and cold water to drink because of the water brought up by capillary action saving electricity all over the world to purify water (e.g. like coconut tree).

    And these houses could be easily built and also cheaply, we can use modern architecture and try to use living trees instead of walls.
  • Dec 8 2011: My wish is that cities would be more self supporting and integrated. They would grow their own food at different scales, the buildings would have limited impact and work with other buildiings and the landscape to produce no waste. We would design cities that are livable with efficient transportation based on the human scale. we would organize our city around the ability to obtain fresh food, water, healthcare, within a human scale distance for all who live in the city. We would educate citizens how to work together and how to live sustainably.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: Wonderful Amy, please infect your circles with such brilliant inspiration!
  • Dec 8 2011: My wish for city 2.0 is for the project to be attainable. There are many good ideas out there already, from urban (vertical) farming to transit to localized power generation, but they have to be done and promoted in a way to attract private capital. There are many wonderful ideas that can be implemented right now that can be profitable and can win backing from all. These elements need to be implemented first to "prime the pump" or the whole effort will fail and the concept of city 2.0 will be doomed. Momentum must be built.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: This is a bit more lighthearted compared to many of the insightful remarks posted here, but I would love to see a mandatory 2-hour lunch. In my first trip abroad as a teenager, I was delighted to see the various towns I visited close down in the middle of the day to encourage awareness of one's surroundings. We rarely get that opportunity in the U.S. now.
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: My wish for the city 2.0 would be to start with solving some of the basic requirements of community needs. The idea would be to construct some "black-box" structures that could be built with local resources for water, food, power and shelter. These would be modular as they could be combined to handle larger populations. An example of food producing "black-box" structure would be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV9CCxdkOng) 1Million Pounds of Food.
    The concept is based on not designing to solve world problems but small groups of people at the village or neighbourhood level. It would allow for the community to maintain and operate these units. Different geographical locations may require different designs because of the resources available but if the design is simplistic enough I do not see this being a problem. The idea comes from a Canadian heritage commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJq1nNT7mZ0) The water Pump.
    I think another valuable resource we have is plastic. The ocean is filled with plastic garbage ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/23/oprah-shines-light-on-gre_n_190552.html ) just waiting to be collected. IT washes up on every shore line in the world. One recent discovery for a use is light bulbs. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBWi3NtND68). I think we could also mould dense shelters which could withstand earthquakes or possible act as floating buildings if detached from it's platform.
    I don't think ideas are the issue, it coming up with designs which do not require expensive tools or resources. We need a platform which shares these designs and ideas around the globe.
    Adam
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: I would like to present an idea that is not Utopian, it is nuts and bolt city administration. With the intention of implementing the ideals of the City2.0 idea. To do this I have drafted a blog outlining this, at this time it is still in a draft form, but I am going to release it because the essential element of this idea is collaboration.

    If you could please offer opinions about the thought process, how the information is laid out, where it needs to be built upon, etc.

    We are working to build a platform for public engagement and participation that transcends traditional planning processes. We have a dynamic outline to achieve the ideals of the City 2.0 and our wish would be to see it through, document it and share it as a repeatable strategy for Cities around the world.

    Please go to http://nolewalkingshaw.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/city-2-0/ and let me know what you think. This post will evolve as people offer comments.
  • Dec 8 2011: Auroville was founded in 1968 and sprung from a dream of Human Unity, Peace and Harmony. Read more about this wonderful place here: www.auroville.org Namaste, Ann-Charlotte
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: I hope our cities evolve quickly towards being truly clean. Pollution free cities, filled with clean air, clean water and clean energy. I also dream of cities full of clean stuff too, from buildings, to books and bikes. I believe this will happen if we, humanity, base our future on truly cyclical, ecological systems. The magnitude of these systems will be, both larger, and smaller, than city scale. My City 2.0 will receive clean energy, water and food from effective rural systems that span continents. City 2.0 will be built, one clean component at a time, by a multitude of evolving businesses that live, and die, on a scale much smaller than the cities that nurture them. We, as individuals, must all contribute in our own small way.
  • Dec 8 2011: Urban lumber
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: City 2.0 is a city that honors the oneness and sacredness of life above all else. All citizens take a pledge to uphold this principle in every area of the community.
    Every policy, decision, law, negotiation, and conversation takes into account the highest value of life itself. This is the top priority at the forefront of everyone's awareness. Education about the sacredness of life is part of every school curriculum. Businesses fulfill corporate social responsibility by helping to adjust all imbalances that harm the life in people, animals and environment. Government works closely with education, business and spiritual leaders so that balance and justice is upheld with high regard for the life we all share so that we create a world that works for everyone. The city is also creating global connections with sister cities around the world to share what works and what doesn't work so that all benefit from each other's knowledge, skill and resources. In this way, appropriate partnerships are made to fill in all gaps and address all issues. We have the technology to work together as a global community. As Persian poet Saadi said, "We all come from the same source. We are one human family." Online global connections are a part of every classroom so that children become aware that we are each part of a magnificent whole. What will be our contribution?
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: I would wish for an institute of professionals dedicated to rational research on immediate questions of human values. In the same sense that Sam Harris refers to in the Moral Landscape but with the scope cut down to the more normal questions of a person's life as opposed to the more rigorous philosophical research on values and applied ethics traditional philosophers do. The complementary function of that institute would be to have the institute serve as a place where people could go (or write to) to seek conversation about their different value questions.

    Ideally these two functions would feed off of each other. People would come in to have a confidential conversation with a researcher. The conversation would in turn provide raw data on the different facets of a particular, in-the-world and immediate human value problem such as 'how to choose who I marry', 'if/when it's okay to lie to an employer', 'how should I discipline my children', 'how can I choose my major', etc. Using that data the institute could publish FAQ's or reports on common questions and issues that come up in a normal human life "in the city". They wouldn't necessarily advocate a right/wrong but instead offer a complete professional/rigorous analysis of factors other people in the city have taken into consideration when making similar value decisions.

    It would be a secular source for people in the city to come ask difficult questions and have conversations with someone whose credentials can be easily verified and can handle a difficult conversation without: (1) hearing superstitious/religious or subjectively-emotional responses; or (2) being told they need some form of psychological assistance for want of a good conversation with a rational/knowledgeable person prior to a decision. Gathering the data and publishing the data would provide access to anyone in the city who visits the institute's website (or whatever other free mass communication forum is available).
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: I wish all people can unite together and do what they want to do in the City2.0 world.
    Human beings can realise the importance of keeping the environment clean.people can help each other.
  • Dec 8 2011: I'll be short and sweet:
    Use both the right and left side of the brain when building the city, make it beautiful and breathtaking like something out of a fantasy novel.
    Allways remember to promote the arts and literature, for these make up the blood of culture.
    Cooperate with mother earth don't war with her.
    Get Martin Conboy Lighting Design in on this, it's the best lighting business in Canada (truly).
    Good luck, all of us will support you until the end!
  • thumb
    Dec 8 2011: It seems that there are a lot comments about the Venus Project. Whilst some of the ideas are good and universal, the physical planning and architecture is shocking, and is more about image and technology than how people live and work and recreate in cities. We have some scientific analysis that, if applied to the designs of the Venus Project, would clearly demonstrate that is not a wholistic sustainable solution, but a modernist paradigm imposition contrary to natural systems and human social dynamics.
  • Dec 8 2011: This reminds me of the early concepts of EPCOT. One of the great disappointments of Florida’s history was the death of Walt Disney before he could realize his ultimate dream. What a wasted idea.

    "I don't believe there's a challenge anywhere in the world that's more important to people everywhere than finding solutions to the problems of our cities. But where do we begin... how do we start answering this great challenge? Well, we're convinced we must start answering the public need. And the need is for starting from scratch on virgin land and building a special kind of new community that will always be in a state of becoming. It will never cease to be a living blueprint of the future, where people actually live a life they can't find anywhere else in the world." -Walt Disney

    "But the most exciting and by far the most important part of our Florida Project...in fact, the heart of everything we'll be doing in Disney World...will be our Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow! We call it EPCOT." - Walt Disney

    Although many of the ideas of the original EPCOT plans would be crazy and silly. But the heart is the same.
  • Dec 7 2011: that the water, power, sewage be reconsidered as an intrinsic system
  • Dec 7 2011: A city where Psychology today is taught in school. A system designed such that spending is a joy instead of pain from psychological stand point.

    A city where financial tools and instruments are designed such that it liberates people instead of oppress people.

    A city designed with moral values that puts censorship on topics off Class Warfare, Country Warfare, Culture Warfare, Economic Warfare tactics.

    A city where energy production is decentralized and has fairly simple systems to harness and transmit energy from nature.

    A city with right proportion of natural aesthetics in the form of Snow Mountains, Mountains, Forests, Waterfalls and Greenery in and around the neighborhood.

    A city with structures designed and colored that are constantly changing as a function of time in a fashion such that it amuses and stimulates positive energy from brain cells.
  • Dec 7 2011: Hello everyone, I have a class of 7th graders on Oahu Hawaii that are working on drafting what their idea of City 2.0 would be. Most of what we have talked about so far are the basic human rights, as there are many homeless people in our state of Hawaii and the students here see that as a failure of society to take care of those who are in need the most. I will continue to update this forum with what we come up with, and will hopefully have a rough draft of what the future citizens of the City of the Future think it should look like. If there are any specific questions anyone would like to have me ask the class, I would be more than happy to relay your questions. Mahalo
    • thumb
      Dec 8 2011: Great!
      I think that the City 2.0 design should be permeable in its design so that if for example your Kids come up with a good idea:
      1. The idea should be aknowledged
      2. The dedicated community should take up the idea and refine it

      The City 2.0 wastes no human ressources. It is organically open to its cognitive and emotional environment.
  • Dec 7 2011: I wish that in city 2.0 lived people who are interested in environment in whitch they live.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: Wait, so By 2012 it is projected that approx 10 Billion people will be on the Planet? We're at 7 Billion and counting but around this time next year 10 billion? Wow

    In regards to the Carbon Footprint, I would have to jump on board with everyone who is mentioning the Venus Project.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: A set of more robust analytics that won't reduce solely to money (anymore than DNA can be reduced simply to proteins without regard to structure and innovation).
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: Less than 5 minutes ago: I want in on the collaboration team... In Salt Lake City we have been working hard to meet each of the noted points of City2.0 and I belive we could contribute to the conversation. I believe we can provide real world examples of what we have done to already consider Salt lake City a City2.0 city, plus we have a new project under way that redefines public engagement and participation, in the City 2.0 spirit.

    .Salt Lake City could be a shining example of the City 2.0
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: Programmability. This is the essential concept of abstract thinking that should be applied to most everything we want to make more efficient. To understand it, think of flying an airplane. In the old days, the wheel, pedals, and knobs were connected by wires to their exterior counterparts. Today, all the hydraulics that move things are connected to a computer, and the person uses various input mechanisms to tell the computer what he/she wants to do, and it's the programming that carries it out. Some of that happens in your car today. To apply it to cities, we need to create these interface layers where we can connect the inputs and outputs to a network and use programming languages to control. A good example of this is already underway. See www.pachube.com
  • Dec 7 2011: City 2.0 must be full of nature - living walls, hanging gardens, green roofs, roof-top gardens, community garens and wilderness spaces. and an abundance of trees to clean the air, delight the senses and provide habitats for birds, bats, squirrels, monkeys.

    City 2.0 must work with nature - harvest rainwater, use daylight, use passive solar for heating and ventilation, generate electricty from roof-top solar panels, wind and waste gas. It must be energy efficient, and the lighting should be intelligent - we need to be able to see the stars!

    City 2.0 must be walkable - encouraging walking, biking. most days you shouldn't need to use a car in the city - and if you do, you hire an electric one rather then owning one. And public transport should be clean, zero-carbon and integrated acorss the diferent modes.

    City 2.0 needs to encourage closed loops - no waste that isn't 'food' for another process. And it needs to be resilient, to plan for events like floods by having floodplain buildings on stilts etc.

    Above all, it must be beautiful, and abound in creative public spaces and parks.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: ZOOM IN ON THE TERMS OF CITY 2.0:
    Amy Novogratz lays out very clearly what is needed for the TED wish for City 2.0.

    There are many good ideas here. With City 2.0 being specifically described by Amy as "not a sterile utopian dream, but a REAL-WORLD UPGRADE tapping into humanity's collective wisdom," the ideas presented at this juncture should be focused on how to capture all the amazing ideas of this group (as well as the citizenry of cities interested in upgrading to City 2.0.)

    A BRIEF DOSE OF REALITY:
    $100,000 will not go far in FOUNDING and ESTABLISHING a City 2.0. Neither will it do much to, say, upgrade a city like New York to "green" status.

    THE IDEA:
    A City 2.0 competition involving the best, most convincing vision/commitment from a city to upgrade from a 1.0 city to City 2.0.

    THE WINS:
    * This would create the need for applicant cities to have already worked on unifying their vision of an upgraded city, in effect multiplying effectiveness of $100k ten-fold or more.
    * The TED wish money would be required to be spent on the City 2.0 for that model city as an "open-source" city, a software-website-app package for citizens to use daily, interacting w/ City 2.0 standards, vision, ranking, envisioning coming improvements, etc.
    * The competition would require a Vision/Mission from both city council & key citizen group representation.
    * TED could commit to rallying past TED Fellow's to volunteer their time to the winning city for a series of charettes.
    * The winner would agree to certain (reasonable) terms as laid out by a consortium visionaries in the areas of land use requirements, sustainable development, art/culture development, etc.
    * Winning city would agree to host City 2.0 contest of their own to neighboring cities, starting the City 2.0 virus. Will pass on best practices, etc.
    • thumb
      Dec 7 2011: What the heck do you mean “Amy Novogratz lays out very clearly what is needed for the TED wish for City 2.0.”???

      I’m so confused I don’t know which way to turn. I feel like I’ve been cornered in an airport by a swarm of Hari-Krishnas. All these TED groupies seem to be chanting some incantation in a language I don’t understand.

      What is “The City 2.0”? Who came up with the idea? Is this just something out of Dilbert - that is - they need a new product, so first thing come up with a new name?
      • thumb
        Dec 7 2011: Hey, Tim, I think I understand what you mean. When I saw the announcement about the prize, the first thing I´ve done was to look after a TED talk named 'City 2.0" to understand what is it all about. Then I saw there is none, and assumed, by Amy´s message, that it is a concept still to be created, and it will be done collaboratively. I understand that Amy gave some insights as to what such a city would be like, leaving us with "generating" questions (I don´t know if this term is understandable translated into english...). This is what I´ve got about "The city 2.0" proposal.
      • thumb
        Dec 7 2011: To Tim and Alexander it's very clearly stated in the Conversation description what City 2.0 is.
        • thumb
          Dec 7 2011: Marketing jibberish Corvida. Come on, what does this mean?:

          “The wish will be unveiled during the TED Prize session on February 29, 2012.”

          Look, those of you that are so swept away by TED mysticism, so ingrained with TED dogma, so overcome by TED community spirit that you refuse to ever question any of the silliness that they employ in directing their legions to carry out their master plans are going to be very disappointed when you discover your high priests are acting out of self interest. Transparency should be demanded. Obfuscation should be called out.

          Of course, shunning the apostates who question their methods is the most likely approach they will take.
      • thumb
        Dec 7 2011: Tim, I guess, thinking about it, it may be a bit confusing.

        When TED announces the thought of "City 2.0" being a TED prize winner, it made immediate sense to me in that I have watched most all of the TED videos. In seeing TED over the years, one has noticed a mode of operation evolve.

        For example, in the past, the TED staff and attendees may have congregated around a theme, say "oceans", and applied the amorphous ideals of technology, entertainment, and design around oceans. Talks, discussions, solutions from way out of the box have arisen. The ideas are then hedged with a dose of reality. Sometimes TEDx conferences surround that topic. Sometimes an applicant to the TED prize will come up with a solution to a specific problem in the area of oceans, or they may deliver a point of view that was previously not considered.

        Taking this unrestricted, creative-thinking approach and applying to a theme City 2.0 and offering it as the TED prize is intended to not have too many terms. Instead, it is to offer a theme that the TED community (staffers, attendees, and those posting on the community) will congregate around with that same mode of operation.

        The goal is to get ideas starting, open up conversations, identify previously unnoticed issues and to think openly and creatively on how to affect the idea of a city. Several previous TED talks (searchable in the database) would be a good starting point for current ideas and problems with the model of what we know of as a city today.

        The TED wish of a City 2.0 is to then dream about what we can do to upgrade the current city. When you compared it to Web 2.0, you made a fair comparison. We first had to identify what we though was outdated with Web 1.0 and then problem solve and innovate for Web 2.0 (some of which grew organically.)

        Similarly to City 2.0, we are being asked to pioneer new thoughts for the idea of a city, what the problems are, and how we can approach it anew. And are giving $100,000 at the best idea
  • Dec 7 2011: It seems that there is much talk about what things will look like in these cities. What i don't see is any talk about the one major essential. That is food. As we see the end of oil over the next few years a shift in where our food comes from and how it is produced will just have to occur.
    We will no longer be able to just assume that it will always be there in abundance and cheap. Most of us will have to be much more hands on in the growing of our own food. I think that the city of the future will be smaller, and obviously more in number, and very much entwined with agriculture. The design and layout of the city will need to be done to maximize the creation of micro climates to first provide more food production and then to improve the energy efficiency of the living spaces as we will not have that cheap fossil fuel to keep us cool or warm.
    Even the 100 mile meal will be much to far. The vast majority of the food that we will eat in the future cities will have to be produced within walking distance, not driving distance.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: Considering the state of cities 1.0, the founding of City 2.0 would have to be a well chosen location to give it a chance to a) succeed in the early phase of development, and b) to allow it to be viral.

    Initial success can be relatively easy to achieve. The long term sustainability is important, but for the City 2.0 initiative to TRULY have succeeded would be measured on the improvements (happiness, health, education, economics) of neighboring cities.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: One approach would have to involve regulations (read "community vision"). An example is the Chinese city, Dashan. An example of regulation/community vision working well is the fact that in Dashan vehicles operating on fossil fuels are only allowed to drive within a certain distance of the city center. Semi trucks would deliver loads to the exterior perimeter, and delivery vehicles running on sustainable energy distribute the goods.

    It is a win for local delivery business, a win for the quality of life of residents, and a win ecologically.

    Good ideas will abound and BE EFFECTIVELY IMPLIMENTED for City 2.0 only when the founding members have a unified set of values and vision.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: We, the people, already awarded this idea long time ago, there are people in nearly every country trying to educate people with new values related with sustainability, science and the use of technology, to create an ecofriendly enviroment.
    You can see something here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/travis-walter-donovan/the-zeitgeist-movement-en_b_501517.html but you know, we don't need money, we barely use it, we don't even ask for it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
  • Dec 7 2011: For City 2.0, TED should choose a symbol that can resonate around the world and that can illustrate the fundamental problem with the pattern of unsustainable human settlement on the planet.

    Southern California is the place that much of the world has rightly or wrongly chosen to emulate. While at one time an exemplar of sustainable development when the Pacific Electric Red Cars, the largest electric railway in the world, were in operation, the region replaced its extensive system of streetcars with a system of freeways. And, the rest is history.

    Before the domination of oil, cars, and freeways and before the supplanting of trains by airplanes, southern California had three rural-to-urban transects that were organized around three centuries-old urban cores: Los Angeles; San Diego; and, San Bernardino.

    With the advent of the freeway system and the rise of airports in the coastal counties, the economies of Los Angeles and San Diego grew at a fast rate while San Bernardino fell into decline and brought with it the entire Inland Empire region. The city now has, after Detroit, the second highest percentage of residents living below the poverty line in the U.S. among larger municipalities even though southern California, as a region, is the most valuable agglomeration of real estate in the world. But, this phenomenon of socioeconomic segregation and constrained socioeconomic mobility is entirely traceable to the decisions to marry the invention of the automobile to that of the freeway. San Bernardino and SCAG, the metropolitan-planning organization for the six-county region, however, have embarked on an incredibly-ambitious strategy to re-establish the city as southern California's third urban core and to regain parity with the first-tier cities, Los Angeles and San Diego. Nowhere else in the world is an effort of this magnitude being undertaken, and the people involved are all heroes in my opinion. So, they deserve the attention and recognition of TED, too.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: The City 2.0
    I would like to contribute to this discussion by presenting general principles that would drive the City 2.0. Technology is all there, and once principles are well defined, it would be easier to discuss details.
    A city 2.0 would have a design that celebrates life, humanity and nature. The main inspiration of this city is nature itself. Technology is a means, not an end. Biomimicry 3.8 is a fundamental design principle. Cradle to cradle is another fundamental design principle. “Peopleware”, “Socialware”,”Mindware” “Heartware” would be supported by software and hardware, and not substituted by it.
    A city mimicking an organism, where neighborhoods works as organs, and people as “stem cells”, with a strong capacity to express themselves in benefit of the city community (organism).
    Each neighborhood would be autonomous in all essential human needs, as shelter, food, clothing, healthcare, productive activity (not jobs!), safety, education, child care, culture; minimizing transportation needs. Social- entrepreneurship would be strongly promoted, as a means to solve city problems and generating meaningful decentralized productive activity.
    But by autonomous I mean that the neighborhood would need to produce some of its basic needs while using neighborhood “outputs” (as sewage, garbage) as raw materials. And it can be closely, intrinsically and deep connected to “Rural 2.0” areas that provide the neighborhood the elements it cannot produce.
    I think it is impossible to think about “The City 2.0” without thinking “The Rural 2.0”.
    People would be able to access all their needs on a walking distance, and would translocate between neighborhoods or to the “central hub” by small public trams or bikes. Rural areas would be connected to facilitate goods transportation and “distribution hubs” (what we call supermarkets today) would be linked to this transportation network. “Distribution hubs” would be similar to urban farms, producing many of the sold goods right on the
  • Dec 7 2011: Ah, and if you do not have such a project for humanity with a global approach in mind, is with no real value. The planet is a whole, from weather to it´s core and oceans. If only the scientists, instead of struggling to make plans for colonizing Mars, have plans to colonize the Earth with the same approach....
  • Dec 7 2011: I got a idea about the way to reuse the plastic food bag.If we burn them,the poisonous gas will come to the air.What about making them small pieces by a scissors.The degradation is difficult.However ,it is easy to make it safe to exsit on the earth with the small form.
  • Dec 7 2011: Gay marriage = no unplanned pregnancies
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: With 9 billion people on the horizon, it is about time to think of very large but sustainable cities to reduce pressure on Nature and planet's Ecosystem Services. If we can double the current population density in a sustainable way from 33,000 people per SQ KM (top 10 high density cities) to 60,000 per SQ KM, we would need 150,000 SQ KM of space to reside all human population.

    If we could also pick strategic locations for these cities (existing or new) and migrate human populations in an organized way, to 350 cities of 25 million people each, we can avoid conflicts, wars, hunger and suffering. In addition to avoid all these, we will have a beautiful planet for our future generations.

    It is in our reach, it is financially viable, it is unifying and time for action is now.
  • Dec 7 2011: I applaud most of the ideas here on TED, but I've yet to see the infrastructure within society to make these dreams come true --exclusive of corrupt governments and large corporations or investors who expect a profit. Until we take greed out of the picture--we may be doomed. Research that doesn't show positive results is never published. Drugs that can cure disease--if found to be too costly to produce--are never put on the market. Inventions that have no profit--even if they solve a problem--are left on the drawing board. Everything revolves around money. Artists, musicians, inventors and generally creative thinkers often starve in our world. That should be the TED question. How do we take profit out of the picture long enough to solve our problems.
  • Dec 7 2011: To let the youth have a "true" voice in shaping their future: The City 2.0 through a grassroots elementary education level!
  • Dec 7 2011: Hmmm City 2.0, let see, my contribution would be in greening up the city itself. Use buildings to be vertical agricultural growing surfaces (ie Hydroponic style), using the gray water generated from inside the building for irrigation and the resulting product of the installed composting toilets as fertilizer.

    Building's HEVAC requirements would be reduced because of the living walls that shade it from the sun, CO2 would be absorbed, not sure but I believe that plants would be a natural sound deaden-er and there would be a supply of locally grown produce. Might even keep the whole city cooler in the summar
  • Dec 7 2011: Moving our bodies through time and space is essential to who we are and where we come from: endurance runners who could hunt for food during the hot daylight for many miles and hours while dangerous prey rested in the shade. This let us develop our tool-making abilities and to nourish our brain and body with plenty of food.

    Over time, the rise of our institutions of education, research, business, and government all focused on the brain and the body seemed neglected as a wealth-generating resource; and today we live mostly a sedentary life often behind desks and in front of a screen. Our average body weight and the rise of diabetes suggests that we are unhealthy and that our brain-based world seems unsustainable.

    Modeshift: Cities can shatter the current car-based model of transportation and reinvent a multi-modal model of transportation. From human-powered vehicles such as bicycles and power-assisted cycles, to bus and light-rail public transportation, to ingenius ways of connecting transportation data and sensors to social networks and available transport options; our cities can move things and people on a whole new level.

    Cities can become highly efficient and interconnected channels that move people and things across urban spaces at a rapid clip. Cars no longer need to dominate the urbanscape. Instead, people also use bicycles, they walk and interact with their surroundings and move themselves with renewed energy, health, and happiness. Cities are well designed with interconnected transport paths outfitted with safe facilities for the living and moving: restrooms, rest areas for food and drink, and even pay-for-use shower/bath facilities.

    As a consequence, local businesses flourish as a vertical economy takes shape - from design and manufacture of modular vehicles that interconnect on the new pathways, to the repair and maintenance of vehicles. Horizontally, businesses cater to the flourishing urban local market that remains anchored in a global economy.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: My wish for City 2.0.... to be left alone. And perhaps to have a mundane life where I could wake up, have a cup of coffee in solitude, read some books, work out in a gym, hike (outside of City 2.0!), watch it rain (or snow), write a bit -- just for friends -- and think about my own transience and try to find some meaning and purpose for my life. My wish would be that all the folks in love with one more version of Plato's Republic would not notice my existence and let me live my life out without trying to improve me. Yep, my wish, to just observe humanity.... from a distance.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: Mmmm. I suspect that until the population of the planet falls to a sustainable level the concept of better cities only gives us false hope. So my wish for City 2.0 is genuinely sustainable. Sine qua non!
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: One thing I hope for in cities is to bring back the concept of a "community doctor". I would completely remove any business worries from a healthcare office. People of a community would have input in the doctor(s) hired for that community and all well services are provided to the community by this facility. There would be no "business" concerns at all for any of the members of the staff there and a preventative, educational wellness approach would be essential. The facility would be responsible for keeping their community healthy to the best of their ability and that's it.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: The City 2.0 has many responsibilities:

    socio-economic // environmental // spatial // short-term & long-term design // better adapted buildings & materials // embedded supply networks with cradle to cradle design // changes in governance // a less colonial relationship with rural areas & inner cities // provide stability while allowing change // promoting the public & democratic over the private & unaccountable // proper size // population // biopolitical // more useable, embedded & relatable // differently assembled // better understanding of human behavior & learning // and so on, forever and ever.

    So, it seems the rallying call of the TED Prize will be "Maximize benefits, minimize costs!"

    That hardly stirs the soul, but maybe it's practical enough, considering TED wants to invest $100,000 in something.

    It's true that "what benefits" is controversial, as well as "what costs" & "which costs are acceptable" are similarly so. Passionate arguments can develop around different ideas of efficiency: what should exist & what should not.

    However, it seems that change requires something more emotional, visceral to catch the passionate imaginations of us all & move us toward a better arrangement -- in addition to the practical aspects of max/min.

    So, those considerations would be:

    the internal architecture within humans of the proper city & it's proper relations to other things // changing the mental image of the city & what it should be // ideology of a city's form // changing expectations & associations // and so on, relating to the political & artistic experiences of living in spaces with others.

    Same problem. What can we rally around?

    I wish The City 2.0 would rally around happiness as a way to connect these diverse responsibilities & considerations into one human-sized goal.

    Efficiency is important, no doubt. However, using happiness as our end-goal will give us more room to be human as we are compelled to seriously rethink ourselves & our environment.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: no cars within the real city limits, electric transportation in all forms other that automobiles within the city center especially.
    solar panels on every roof and in great big areas around the city limits. bikes. outdoor advertising to a minimum/ if at all.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: My wish would be for Geoffrey West of SFI to be involved in this project. Few have thought about cities in such a systemic yet creative way.
  • Dec 7 2011: The City of the Future should be Free of toxic and carelessly used disposable plastics.

    As we shift from a Cradle to Grave to a more sustainable Cradle to Cradle model, we can move away from the wasteful use of any materials such as disposable and single use plastics and take into account the true costs and price of use to our health, the health of animals, the Ocean and to the Environment.
    With Extended Producer Responsibility and the True (yet often hidden)costs of materials and energy taken into account, the City 2.0 will be a wonderful, healthy and functional place to live.
    We must find a way to respect and incorporate Nature, because we are a part of it. The toxins which leach from plastics into my food and drink and into my body should not be a part of it.

    Here's to Plastic Free Times in The City 2.0
  • Dec 7 2011: My wish is for urban farming to be included in every possible way--using vacant land, parks, and green spaces to raise fruits and vegetables; allowing and encouraging backyard chicken raising; educational and research/design programs to help people learn how to grow food indoors; etc. Ready access to fresh healthy food is critical to healthy urban life, as is ready access to contact with nature. Food production is a way to have both.
  • Dec 7 2011: I have been reading the English translation of "The Future of Man" by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and find his thoughts on human population and organization pertinent to this conversation. From my interpretation, he proposes that the evolution of primal single-cell life forms to highly organized multi-cellular beings was a density dependent phenomenon. In the primordial ooze the competition for resources became less advantageous with high population density and cells began to organize in order to promote efficiency and survival. The result was a multi-cellular life form.

    Chardin proposes that the human population is moving in the same direction and we are therefore becoming increasingly organized and the importance of that organization is paramount to resource management. If this analogy is philosophically sound (I think it's worth discussion), then we have to address more than mechanical limitations. In order for any social organization to function, the majority of humans must wholeheartedly determine that it is in our best interest to work together.

    I think it is important to remember that size is a limiting factor in organization. Even though we have the ability to create large scale organizations, not all organizations are suited to such a scale. Malcom Gladwell makes good argument in "The Tipping Point" for serious consideration of organization size. On a biological level, what works for elephants does not work for tiger beetles. Therefore, the question is how large should human cities be and what freedoms are allowed such a collection?

    Perhaps providing simple structure, like size limitations would perpetuate an organic development of diverse and efficient urban societies. Truly social organisms, like ants, know that when the colony becomes too large the efficiency of the whole is compromised; so, alates disperse to find new nests. Now that we are living outside the ancient laws of nature, functional capacity becomes very important science.
  • thumb
    Dec 7 2011: I have increasingly become interested in Ancient Greece and their concept of the Polis. It seems to me that there is much to learn from the Ancient Greeks - it's a bit sad and ironic to say the least that they Modern Greeks are having so much trouble. I would be curious to hear if the TED Community feels like the Ancient Greeks had it right in terms of their approach to designing and governing their cities and making them work for all. I guess if I were to put this in the form of a wish it would be for us to reclaim the "Demos" in Democracy, and the "Polis" in Politics and use them to improve our civic lives.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Anyone else feel like we're being scammed when a new conversation suddenly appears with a bunch of comments by people who never commented before?
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: I wish for a place for people to live to their best capacity.
    I wish:
    for a city in which the systems are designed as components of an integrated, healthful whole;
    where a diversity of spaces and structures coexist within a framework plan that places community first,
    with sustainability as an 'of course';
    where circulation (transportation) is easy and accessible to all;
    where people collaborate to solve the problems in their community, or even help solve problems in other people's communities;
    a place where people learn and live the principles of acceptance, achievement and sharing.

    And if the wish were limited, I'd ask for an immediate end to poor land use development.
  • Dec 6 2011: The problem I've seen in many cities in the U.K. is the issue of gentrification of 'poorer' areas.

    Gentrification is the slow (or sudden) creep up the social ladder an area can make but its very rarely driven by the community being gentrified. Where there were pubs there are now trendy bars, where there were greasy spoon cafe's there are now bistro delis but usually the median household income hasn't increased.

    This leaves a lot of people, particularly the increasing renting population, in a situation where housing prices are going up not because the social class in the area has changed but the people able to move into homes or buy them has changed. Eventually suburbia has to hit a level where commuting is awkward and I believe what's happening is the suburbs are moving into the cities. This leaves the poor people with histories, jobs and family in the city can be pushed out to who knows where because either their housing benefit doesn't cover the cost of rent any more or simply the cost of 'living' in their area has increased as a lure to the modern city types.

    This is just not an issue of housing or economics but one of the general culture of a city. I grew up in Glasgow and very soon the only thing on the clydeside will be modern flats and soon any history of ship-building, of families in tenements and their local pubs and shops will be forgotten.
  • Dec 6 2011: Cty 2.0 ~ the new earth must carry within its education and creative expression the understanding of the time/space relation with our species ~ we are defined by how we think, if we think the old ways, we do not change. The world is in effect a holographic projection in our minds. The mind is not capable to write outside of the box. We humans are creators of matter with our alignment to source energy, the cosmic beingness that we are and unless we agree that this is true, a true change cannot happen.

    The point I want to make is that we need to disengage from the current belief systems around number of people on the planet or the current problems. Those problems are solved when the personal frequency of a person rises, the outside that is a holographic projection of the belief systems will adapt to a higher evolutionary state of being, that includes the whole planet. We only need to change the content of our belief systems, and follow the inner pulses of our quantum beingness, that what resides in the heart, the real intuition. There would no problem left unanswered as this responds to all requests.

    I guess this might be a bit far fetched, but I assure you this is how the world works. Opening the portal of the heart gives great rewards beyond mental comprehension.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Fractal Planning for a Sustainable Future?.. Why not check it out :)
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fractal-Planning-Solutions-Ltd/109017094107?ref=share
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: For me, a City 2.0 would be a Free City " based on voluntary choices and actions. People and businesses freely decide to move to them, and then to stay or not, based on how much they benefit from the experience." Please take a look at this visionary project http://www.freecities.org/
  • Dec 6 2011: How about a mobile force of talented gardeners to turn available spaces into thriving gardens?

    http://farmscapegardens.com/blog/1

    http://farmscapegardens.com/blog/137

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jpmLiGz4gk
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish for City 2.0 is that living in there will be for sharing creativity,motivation and personal leadership as a common mission among its people and for working human values with team spirit, in contact with nature environment and preserving it for the generations to come.
  • Dec 6 2011: Building and city planning codes that require all comercial rooftops be designed to support and provide access for an independant greenhouse industry. Just imagine the local job creation prospects for individuals and groups interested in growing food in city centers and suburbs. Or a company like Costco selling produce grown on its roof. It seems like such a natural progression, supply and distribution processes are established and waste managment infrastructure already exists.
  • Dec 6 2011: Can something inorganic become organic? Can a city be a truly living thing? Here's City 3.0:

    Faced with ~10 billion citizens by ~2055, our planet will face many difficulties. She will need to feed, shelter, and ...compel all these billions while doing as little harm to herself as possible. She will need to use natural forces like gravity and evaporation, heating and cooling, community and family, energy conservation and creation, combined with experience and wisdom to perservere.

    I believe our next step is a move from the age of diaspora to the age of coalescence; from interdependence to independence, and from relatively bigger to relatively smaller.

    Imagine a hive-like structure, with a ~10km diameter, rising ~2-3kms, with industrial (lowest), commercial (middle), and residential (upper) layers - some open to the outside, others fully enclosed. It would be homogeneously populated (~1 million per structure), because like people tend to be more harmonious, and familial. It will produce its own food (lowest layers), manufacture its own goods (just above), conduct mostly local commerce (think System D), and live in extended family complexes. It will produce some goods for "export" to other hives, and correspondingly import what it can't produce locally.

    People will live and work locally, inhabit communities where the children, infirm, and elderly are cared for en famille, be educated and entertained within the hive, and live based on their contributions to the community and the hive as a whole. Commerce will mostly (except for inter-hive trade) be based on trade and in-kind vs. currency.

    Governance will be simpler, communal, & based on democratic principles; with little (if any) currency changing hands, corruption will be a barter process,ideally limiting the magnitude of negative effect.

    There is more to this, and it might feel utopian, but given economic, environmental, social, health and humanity issues we face, humanity has made its boldest leaps...
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish for City 2.0 is that there be substantial progress made toward the transformation of inner-city neighborhoods. Cities have neglected this valuable asset for too long. Regeneration of inner-city neighborhood business districts are an opportunity to capitalize on local entrepreneurial spirit while addressing the issues of jobs and wealth building for low income residents while creating healthy and vital living, working, and social experiences.
  • Dec 6 2011: The future city needs to find practical solutions to diverse communities. Urban blight stems from the ability of those that have resources to move away from the poor and disenfranchised. China has built amazing megalopolis but at the expense of completely separating from a general populace, creating a elitist haven for the rich.

    Practical communities need to create spaces for all strata of society and through all different life phases. The young living on their own, in college and just out of it. Starting families seeking to be in close proximity to schools and family oriented neighborhoods. And the retired, who may have more resources, seek smaller places to live, but a higher standard of living.

    We have to take on the challenge of defining a city that solves in real pragmatic ways the issues of our modern society.
  • Dec 6 2011: I hope that this will serve as a repository of best practices. Among those best practices that reduce traffic congestion, traffic injuries, pollution, and time wasted are roundabouts (not to be confused with traffic circles nor rotaries). For more on this, see: "Continued Reliance on Traffic Signals: The Cost of Missed Opportunities to Improve Traffic Flow and Safety at Urban Intersections":
    http://www.iihs.org/research/paper_pdfs/mf_1848.pdf

    -Gary
  • Dec 6 2011: For the color of one's skin to be treated in the same regard as their eye color or hair color.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish is for cities with excellent school systems to share how they're creating cities for the future. This includes how they use data, expert analysis from many fields, and how they model best practices around the globe.

    Educating children for a globalized, urban world poses new challenges and opportunities. Among the challenges are how to offer an excellent education without sacrificing access and equity. Among the opportunities are how to help a rising generation think about the world based on the demands of a resource-stressed, globalized world.

    Great cities around the world are adopting education reform as a way to build thriving--and they hope, over time, sustainable--cities.

    In the last five years, promising new trends are starting to emerge. OECD has very interesting data on how school systems have successfully put a focus on real-world inquiry and problem solving as a way to raise student achievement. OECD has also shown that in the medium- to long-term, it leads to increased local economic development. Most of these cities are in the Pacific Rim, and most of them (coincidentally?) have correlating plans for greener technology and infrastructure.

    Bravo on awarding the TED prize to an idea. Several studies estimate that majority of the world's population live in cities, as of 2011. This is very new; compared to 200 years ago, only about 3% lived in urban areas. A perfect time to think and spread ideas on these issues.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Instead of New York city surrounding "Central Park" couldn't "Central Park" surround city 2.0?
    http://goo.gl/CKkOq
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My wish is to develop an international film festival for PSA's (60 seconds or less) to convince the average person community sustainability is not only possible but can and is a reality. Much like the second-hand smoking PSAs did in the '90s, these PSAs could be used by any community in the world to inspire the change at the local level.

    Key for short films will be to make the idea simple and something people can relate to. With smart phones and editing software, virtually anyone could make an entry. A coalition of organizations could sponsor, organize, and get the word out.

    "All sustainability is local." - William McDonough
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Throughout prolonged power outagesin the NE. I realized that our complex dependence on oil is a severe detriment. Every house and aptartment should have some alternative heat source that one can use wthout electricity or oil. An entire city free of it would be remarkable and awesome! Whether we could use waste to generate fuel or sunlight or algae or all of the above, it could be done.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: I'd like to see collaborative, contextual, experiential learning opportunities as an integral component of City 2.0. My wish is that Knowledge is a celebrated end unto itself in the City(which definitely needs a less sterile name! City of Hope? City of Promise?) , where libraries are core community learning centers, where every business has a mentoring and apprenticeship program, where wifi is as common as radio, and the clouds above the city are filled with information. I wish for a City driven by a Knowledge economy!
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: How big should City 2.0 be?

    How can we be informed what is going in the city, who needs help etc. in the most efficient way?
    • Dec 12 2011: Lots of good info here! I'm excited just because of that. The proper process is not opinionated, a bird does not stop building its nest until it can hold the proper weight.

      Here's My Take - Given a blank slated massive land.

      1. Stop/Hold Everything Today. Assess all materials - (account for mining, and recycling of old cities and products)
      2. Assess the access points for materials - Then design the size
      3. Categorize everything in the city
      4. Place categories, divide land.
      5. Think people, before buildings, think function before aesthetics.
      6. Design and build construction materials and rigs.
      7. Program to connect a communication system within the automation of construction.
      8. Commence automated construction - tracking all initial materials right down to the installment.
      9. Test running & refining
      10. Move 'em in dynamically.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Wish 1) City 2.0 is a online & offline school offered for free or by donation by Ted experts in the various fields which are in dire need of our attention in this day in age, environment, education, technology, collaboration, culture, economics, arts, music action, how to teach oneself.

    Wish 2) An understanding that our conscious personal and collective vision is the most powerful tool for change. Each person is a keyholder to a unique understanding of the universe. It is the individual's job to take action using their gifts and shine with strength guided by their heart as a compass.
  • Dec 6 2011: Big data won't save cities, it will overwhelm them. Planners can barely process the data they already have, the petaverse will paralyze them. Urban planning has to change. My wish is for a city that plans itself!
    • thumb
      Dec 6 2011: "a city that plans itself!" (a great idea that is already being implemented in cities such as Barcelona) requires massive amounts of data, even more than the amount of data that is inundating planners now.

      In order to have a city plan itself. One first needs to have its ear to the ground in order to know how to respond to existing conditions. Thus data sensors need to be plentiful and thus the data streams coming from them would be even more plentiful. One would then need the software to assimilate real-time data in order to consider all of the factors, weigh them, and then determine the greatest priority based the data feed. Next the solutions needs to be implemented with AI systems and the like. All of which requires very technical and data intensive systems. I don't see how we can have a "city that plans itself" without "Big data". Please enlighten us how you plan to do it without this?
      • Dec 7 2011: I don't know - the whole point of participatory planning is that people already know the conditions and problems they face, you just need to provide opportunities for them to tell you and you need to be prepared to listen. More sensory data doesn't necessarily add value to that process. It could but it needs to be synthesized in a digestible way and put into context by professionals. Today, most big data in smart cities seems to be about command and control, and is formatted accordingly. Like I said, I think we need a new model of urban planning for City 2.0.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: In terms of identifying the immediate hunger for the City 2.0 concept, Occupy Wall Street (to which I am NOT affiliated) illustrated that there is a passion for a new way of discussing ideas and creating proactive action. Although reaching globally, it has struggled to maintain a permanent space or form adequate modes of organizing, to galvanize this passion into action.

    Many cities around the world are doing much to create City 2.0, but are seeking input from the people, which is a odd disconnect with the Occupiers who are screaming to be heard. My wish for City 2.0 (and vision for the $100K) is to create virtual space for the collaboration of people and institutions to create real and lasting changes, big and small, in all our cities.
  • Dec 6 2011: 1) Green buildings
    - Buildings covered in ivy to maximize green space
    - Energy-efficient buildings that can generate their own electricity
    2) Electric cars and lots of public transportation
  • Dec 6 2011: Our economic system is founded on nothing more intelligent than fear, leaving every human on the planet pitted against nature and the rest of humanity.

    Until and unless this rotten core is abandoned, with outright global war as the only, the inescapable conclusion, neither this project, nor mankind, nor for that matter any living creature on the planet has a future worth speaking of.

    What are your priorities - building a castle in the sky, or a garden on earth?
  • Dec 6 2011: I hope the team that is involved takes advantage of some of the lessons learned from the creation, habitation, and deconstruction of BRC (Black Rock City) every year. While there is much about it that is uniquely suited to the location and function, there are also some universally useful attributes.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: A wish:

    That when the City 2.0 team is looking for the "real life" challenges they will face, that they take a close look at the Capitol of California, Sacramento. The city is sitting on one of the largest undeveloped urban infill projects in the US at nearly 240 acres. It is called the Sacramento Railyards Project. Its potential as a 2.0 integrated space could be greater than the sizable political and business challenges that are currently steering it to City 1.0. A true live-fire testing ground that could drive a much larger, world-wide change.
  • Dec 6 2011: In my view, the city should result from allowing people to live as near as possible to the way they chose. We should not push to produce any particular outcome. There, of course, will be practical constraints that everyone will have to live with; we cannot abrogate the laws of physics, and we shouldn't try to abrogate the laws of free-market economics. Zoning should be applied only when there are very, very compelling reasons for it. The overall objective is to maximize choice.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: I'd concentrate in a few practical issues regarding cities.

    One could be creating a kit for any homeowner to install a public power-source for electric cars (increasing the offer of recharging points would increase the usefulness of pure electric cars and the interest of carmakers in producing them).
  • Dec 6 2011: To accommodate 10 billion people on planet earth we do not require a city 2.0 ..... We need to look at the billions that live in poverty and design better ways to accomadte them first. Thats how you'll accommodate 10 billion eventually.

    These areas off poverty is where the fastest population growth is occurring ......
  • Dec 6 2011: My wish is that the prize support a project that will have a lasting systemic effect in our cities, not a short-term, sound-byte effort. The City 2.0 deserves great leaders who elevate residents' needs over their own careers. The City 2.0 deserves a great talent pipeline (both inside and outside of government). The City 2.0 deserves to have its own best and brightest use their talents to solve City challenges, as the City Hall Fellows do (www.cityhallfellows.org).
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: The City 2.0 = Placemaking + Positive Psychology
  • Dec 6 2011: My wish for City 2.0 is that it is able to keep its heritage buildings valid and intact while embracing the best of 21st century technology.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: Coca-Cola’s commitment to making a positive difference in the world, LIVE POSITIVELY™, could be a global template for corporate sustainability and a 2.0 world, http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/index.html.
  • Dec 6 2011: Schools 2.0!

    Reverse the cycle of having families with means and young children exiting to the suburbs.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: My idea is that City 2.0 be fundamentally based on a self-organizing system. One that is self-correcting, fault-tolerant, inherently diverse, and self-managed - without a propensity for extreme concentration of wealth or power.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: To increase creativity, opportunity, job and ideas every City 2.0 could create a electronic money to give free to every people resident in town something like 100$/€ every mounth. With this new city currency every person could pay tax, buy food, pay people for job. We can have two currency. The currency of the State (euro/dollar) and the currency of the City.
  • Dec 6 2011: babysteps are always best to achieve big results :) - Let us start with hosting a ted talk where country representatives (leaders) are invited. We put forth the idea of city 2.0 and ask them to come up with the next baby step towards the realization.
  • Dec 6 2011: Education and political change are important, but I think in this age of corporations the sustainable city of the (very near) future will also need an economy in which prices reflect the cost of goods in a globally environmental and social context. Impacts on air quality, water quality, public health, etc will all need to be included in production costs. This will be difficult to calculate. For example, who determines the cost of a factory's emissions for one day? The real cost includes things like compensating farmers for crops lost to climate change, compensating the public for hospital bills incurred due to bad air quality, etc. Our understanding of these effects is still limited, but it is getting better. In City 2.0, I hope that an improved understanding can be integrated into new business models, replacing the current shortsighted ones. I think a political arm will be needed to keep business honest, but it is important that City 2.0 be run by an ecologically informed economy rather than a micromanaging government A carefully managed planet is more profitable in the long term than an unmanaged, unpredictable planet. If global business can come to understand this, then City 2.0 will have the economic engine it needs to build itself.
  • thumb
    Dec 6 2011: What a fantastic idea! I'll definitely take it to the TEDxKraków community and get them involved, but my own wish would be to find ways of integrating the production and preparation of food into the urban landscape in ways that please our wallets, eyes, health and wellbeing, and making this standard practice for planners and urban designers.
    • thumb

      Peter R

      • +1
      Dec 8 2011: Ewa,

      Integrating food production into the urban environment is happening all around us. If you wander the suburbs of Stockholm in fruit season, you can often get so much free fruit from the trees across the city. We can walk in the pockets of forest and pick mushrooms and berries. We can sit by Maloren and fish. In my work, we design an edible landscape just as much as a technical "landscape architect" landscape. Our green roofs work promotes food roofs, as much as any other form. We're working on a new vertical food garden concept, which we hope to announce soon. It all comes down to time, and whether people have the time to tend to the food garden. We also need new entrepreneurs, who are inspired to be urban farmers, through their love of food, locally produced. Just look at New York roof top honey...

      There are many existing ways to integrate the production and preparation of food into the urban landscape in ways that please our wallets, eyes, health and wellbeing. We just need to be open to them. As for changing the practice of Planners and Urban Designers? They unfortunately, in the main, are indoctrinated in modernism, which runs counter to what you and believe and would love to see. It will require a major paradigm shift in urban education before we see this. At least there are pockets of hope in education too
      • thumb
        Dec 8 2011: Hello Peter, thanks for replying! I too see pockets of food production happening - here in Krakow I grow vegetables and herbs on my balcony, we have a huge mulberry tree in my garden and the allotment system of small plots near the centre of cities that the communists instituted is still pretty popular but it's pretty patchy. I'm afraid that landscape designers (let alone planners) who think about edible design as an element of liveability, let alone a way of dealing with the food crisis, are pretty far and few between, so I guess my wish would be to find a way to open their eyes!
        • thumb
          Dec 8 2011: Then let's open a dialogue with Małgorzata Hanzl at the Technical University of Lodz and see how we can start programs of training in this. (Sorry this is the only local polish professional education person I know)