Urban Sharing in Smart Cities The cases of Berlin and London
Background
Findings
Addressing urban sustainability challenges requires changes in the way systems of provision and services are designed, organised and delivered. Two emerging concepts: • Smart cities rely on extensive use of ICT to increase efficiencies in urban areas • Urban sharing builds on collaborative use of idling resources enabled by ICT in densely populated cities. Two case cities: London and Berlin. ICT-dense cities with clearly articulated smart city agendas and abundance of sharing platforms.
Framework
Berlin regulates large and visible sharing organisations, which they believe negatively affect the city. Uber and Foodsharing.de changed their business concepts to adhere to the regulations, while Airbnb operates under unclear legal conditions, which are different in each of the Berlin districts. The government did not demonstrate willingness to negotiate with sharing organisations. We also found high bureaucratic barriers. London adopts a more collaborative approach. It introduced progressive London-wide regulations for short-term lettings. The system is less bureaucratic, and the city is more willing to communicate with sharing organisations - JustPark was banned by some councils, but is now operating across the city thanks to negotiations. Among the reasons why the restrictions were lifted was a study demonstrating that drivers using JustPark minimise their GHG emissions.
Both cities are struggling with budget cuts, so funding for sharing organisations is limited. Available systems of provisions are not directed towards sharing organisations, but towards all startups. Regulator: laws, taxes, bans, policies Provider: financial and infrastructural support Enabler: intangible support, partnerships, awards Consumer: municipal procurement
Berlin offers low level of direct financial support for sharing organisations. Organisations were also disinterested in funding from the local government. London is running a couple of projects to support
Lucie Zvolska, Matthias Lehner, Yuliya Voytenko Palgan, Oksana Mont, Andrius Plepys
innovation. The London Co-investment Fund has sponsored Hubble, a business-to-business online platform for office space; and Flat Club, an online platform for medium-term stays. London boroughs are also granting parking spaces to car clubs, which are believed to lead to lower air pollution. London councils encourage home-base model of car sharing, rather than A-to-B model.
Methodology
15 interviews in Berlin Berlin municipality showed higher interest in the sharing idea before 2015. Currently, the driving force is an organisation called OuiShare. Berlin collaborates with a fruit sharing organisation, but other partnerships with sharing organisations were not found. London supports car sharing as a way to tackle air pollution. The GLA gives car sharing clubs strategic direction and helps promote their activity. JustPark and GetTuxi were invited by the Mayor to represent London at the Smart City Expo World Congress. However, the concept of smart city was not believed to facilitate any real development of urban sharing organisations. Small, non-profit sharing platforms are met with lack of interest from the councils.
The city of Berlin was not found to be a customer of urban sharing organisations. Croydon council in London is collaborating with Zipcar to provide car club services to their employees. The aim is to achieve reductions in the council’s car usage, CO2 emissions, and travel costs.
IIIEE, Tegnérsplatsen 4, Lund, Sweden
11 interviews in London
Conclusions • Urban sharing organisations (USOs) have a potential to contribute to sustainable urban development • The support for USOs, which could potentially lead to improved environmental and social conditions in the cities, remains fragmented • Both cities have succeeded in regulating unwanted, disruptive activities on a case-by-case basis • The regulatory action was not balanced with systems of provisions or enabling policies targeted at USOs • Cities should continue regulating larger USOs on a case-by-case basis, but also introduce supportive mechanisms for smaller, bottom-up USOs to improve their level-playing field with large-scale USOs • This support should aim to maximise the benefits USOs bring to urban sustainability
[email protected]
