Savic, Selena
Lade...
E-Mail-Adresse
Geburtsdatum
Projekt
Organisationseinheiten
Berufsbeschreibung
Nachname
Savic
Vorname
Selena
Name
Savic, Selena
4 Ergebnisse
Suchergebnisse
Gerade angezeigt 1 - 4 von 4
- PublikationThinking Toys for Commoning(Christoph Merian Verlag, 07/2020) Savic, Selena [in: Future Sense. The Social Responsibility of Design and Art]Das vom SNF geförderte Forschungsprojekt ‹Denk-Spielzeug für Commoning› am Institut für Experimen- telle Design- und Medienkulturen (IXDM), HGK FHNW, thematisiert die Komplexität des nachhaltigen Lebens mit explorativen und spielerischen Ansätzen zur Computermodellierung. Wir arbeiten mit drei Schweizer Woh- nungsgenossenschaften zusammen, die Nachhaltigkeit, Selbstversorgung und Nicht-Wachstum fördern. Auf der Grundlage von Informationen, die Genos- senschaften bereitstellen, formulieren wir verschiedene Prinzipien in Bezug auf Zusammenarbeit und Entschei- dungsfindung und kodieren diese in agentenbasierte Modelle von Gemeinschaftssituationen. Wir verwenden das Modell und seine verschiedenen Erscheinungsformen, um mehr über zukünftige Verhaltensweisen und Verstrickungen in der Gemeinschaft zu erfahren. Wir entwerfen Modellschnittstellen als Denkspielzeug: Artefakte, die es Forschenden und Mitgliedern der Community ermöglichen, zukünftige Strategien zu erkennen. Mit den Denkspielzeugen untersuchen wir die Rolle von Artefakten bei der Schaffung von Wissen.04A - Beitrag Sammelband
- PublikationDelegating Management, Augmenting the Mind: What could be the role for technology in commoning practices?(University of Nicosia Research Foundation, 2020) Savic, Selena; Tselika, Evanthia; Sioki, Niki [in: free/libre Technologies, Arts and the Commons. An Unconference about Art, Design, Technology, Making, Cities and their Communities]In 1974, French feminist writer Françoise D' Eaubonne identified two threats to humanity: the destruction of the environment and overpopulation (d’Eaubonne, 1974). “Feminism or death”, she proclaimed alarmingly. The oil crisis of the 1970s heightened the awareness of the finiteness of resources (even though their scarcity was artificially generated in this particular case) and fuelled a plethora of thoughts about alternatives to the capitalist economic system that was perceived as consumptive of the very energy and human resources it attempted to manage. Even though such counterculture ideas did not gain mainstream recognition, and precisely because they failed to cause deeper changes to the system, similar claims are being made today. The Global Footprint Network estimates that the pace of using resources is alarmingly faster than their regeneration capacity1: in eight months we use twelve months worth of resources. Climate change activists as young as teenagers address political and business leaders at World Economic Forums2. Commons-based economy and commoning are proposed by many as more stable, resilient forms of governance (Bollier & Helfrich, 2015; Gibson-Graham, Cameron, & Healy, 2013). It is not a surprise that Elinor Ostrom was given Nobel Prize in Economics for her work on the on governing the commons (Ostrom, 1990) right after the biggest financial crisis we experience in recent times (2008). This discourse is often characterized by inflammatory statements. With the current text, I propose to think calmly about burning topics such as resource sharing, collective decision making and the role of technology in these processes. The relationship between commoning and technology is explored here in the scope of the research project Thinking Toys for Commoning3, looking into the ways media-based tools – such as computer-based models – can make complex commoning processes not only visible but also comprehensible. A multidisciplinary team gathers around questions raised by both lived experience of commoning in a community of individuals, and the experimental approach to computer modelling. We explore, expose and make explicit different phenomena related to common living. We collaborate with three Swiss housing cooperatives, probing organizational and communication challenges they face.04A - Beitrag Sammelband
- PublikationArticulating Politics with Design and Technology: Public Space, Computation and Commoning(2020) Savic, Selena; Miyazaki, ShintaroIf artefacts can have politics (Winner, 1980), and scientific hypotheses can be shaped by political forces (Prigogine and Stengers, 1984) where does this politics come from? Whether we are in autocratic politics or in horizontal decision making based on consensus, design and technology reproduce the principles of the socio-political systems in which they emerged. How does, in turn, design of space and technological artefacts shape the decision making processes in a community? While every kind of social order results in some form of hegemony, Chantal Mouffe (2005) reminds us, agonism reveals the very limit of any rational consensus. In this text, we contrast two extreme hegemonic positions: autocratic design of hostile architectures (unpleasant design) and the (quasi)participative data-driven city management (i.e. smart city); we then discuss an alternative to both, which is driven by a desire for self-organisation, independence and sustainability. In this scope, we discuss an ongoing research project that uses technological artefacts (computational modelling) to probe the agency of these tools in addressing complex topics related to decision making and self-organisation. Touching upon the different hegemonic positions as a starting points for articulating alternatives, we will discuss the connection between sustainable ways of living and technology developed with an emancipatory sensitivity. Working directly with three Swiss housing cooperatives, the research project poses the question of the measure and manner in which new technologies can be not only of use to community efforts but at the heart of their discussions and decision-making.06 - Präsentation
- PublikationArtikulacija zajedničkog kroz dizajn in tehnologiju: javni prostor, tehnokratija i kompjuterski modeli za promisljanje zajedničkog(Institut za urbane politike, 2019) Savic, Selena; Čukić, Iva; Timotijević, Jovana; Radovanović, Ksenija [in: Ka drugačijem gradu]Design, participation and decision making intersect at different moments and in different models of political determination and decision making. From autocratic to horizontal decision making based on consensus, design and technology reproduce the principles of socio-political systems in which they emerge. How does, in turn, design of space and communication networks shape the decision making processes in a community? In the following text, I present three key positions of design practices that determine the potential and efficacy of participation. I will touch upon the role of architects and designers, as well as different approaches to complexity, which include the use of information and communication technologies. The later are often used as instruments to gather citizens opinions and foster participation. Strengthening participation challenges the centrality of designers and experts more generally in decision making process, while it also stresses the critical responsibility of all actors. On the other hand, the discretization of reality (automatic sampling of all sorts, from air quality to citizen's mood) inspires many technocratic propositions. What kinds of politics emerge from these practices?04A - Beitrag Sammelband