Difference between revisions of "Complications of crowdfunded architecture"
(→examples) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
== Complications == | == Complications == | ||
| − | + | following up is a list of complications that make architectural projects special when it comes to crowdsourcing. <br> | |
| + | It`s hard to summarize the problems which occur since they each arise from very individual problems that each architectural project inhabits. As the common ground between a museum, a school in a third world country, a new housing skyscraper or even a public pool is very little- The aim of this article is to focus on problems that a majority of them shares or at least has to consider. | ||
| + | The list so far consists of: | ||
| + | ''Cost''<br> | ||
| + | more money involved, uncalculated costs, follow up expenses /... | ||
| + | ''Treshold''<br> | ||
| + | Limited demand, best solutions, 'one way' street /... | ||
| + | ''Catchment''<br> | ||
| + | Local reach, communication, publicty /... | ||
| + | ''Approval''<br> | ||
| + | burocracy, permits, unforeseen developments /... | ||
| + | ''Longlevity''<br> | ||
| + | lasting responsibilities, longterm plans, maintainance /... | ||
| − | |||
=== ''cost'' === | === ''cost'' === | ||
| Line 143: | Line 154: | ||
== Conclusions == | == Conclusions == | ||
| − | what can we learn from this article? | + | |
| + | what can we learn from this article?<b | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | What seems to become clear during this research is, that there are a lot of different and often very creative solutions one can learn from. Even though one often has to deal with what for example 'brickstarter' described as a 'first mover disadvantage' there are lessons to be learned and the more we try to distribute them the more this | ||
== Outlook == | == Outlook == | ||
how could the future of crowdfunded architecture look like? | how could the future of crowdfunded architecture look like? | ||
Revision as of 23:00, 10 December 2014
Contents
Overview
As Crowdfunding appears in many different ways, catering various services and fields, certain non beneficial aspects appear. This is an article discussing those aspects for architectural content. What are the downsides and weaknesses when trying to crowdfund an architecture project? How could they be avoided? Starting with an theoretic approach and finishing with examples and case studies.
Complications
following up is a list of complications that make architectural projects special when it comes to crowdsourcing.
It`s hard to summarize the problems which occur since they each arise from very individual problems that each architectural project inhabits. As the common ground between a museum, a school in a third world country, a new housing skyscraper or even a public pool is very little- The aim of this article is to focus on problems that a majority of them shares or at least has to consider.
The list so far consists of:
Cost
more money involved, uncalculated costs, follow up expenses /...
Treshold
Limited demand, best solutions, 'one way' street /...
Catchment
Local reach, communication, publicty /...
Approval
burocracy, permits, unforeseen developments /...
Longlevity
lasting responsibilities, longterm plans, maintainance /...
cost
When dealing with architecture its obviously not like financing a new book or design gadget. The money involved is in most cases excessively outranking other design fields. Making a realistic and understandable demand when starting a crowdfunding campaign is crucial for its success. Considering the high building costs, it seems viable to implement strategies to avoid overreaching the campaigns potential.
These strategies could be for example to break a big project into smaller pieces to make it more accessible. Step by step the Project reaches its goals. During the funding process it gains not only reputation, but also followers who will in turn further its completion.
Another potential strategy could be, to combine crowdfunding with other financial solutions. Private investors but also governmental funds tend to invest or support projects far easier when they see a potential market or demand for it. This follows a classic supply and demand economy.
main problems
- The cost of architecture projects is in comparison excessively high.
- additional costs may occur during the process. who is paying them?
- more then 10.000 often seems to be an unrealistic amount.
theoretical solutions
- crowdfunding step by step / research.
- crowdsourcing instead of funding
- combining crowdfunding with other approaches
- financing the growth instead of the initial project
examples
+pool
+pool is a great example on how to deal with a major financial expense in terms of crowdfunding.
The estimated project budget is 15$ million. This number not only scares people away, it is also very unlikely to be achieved. Especially considering the reach that architecture projects normally generate.
So +pools solution involved a strategy of funding the project step by step while raising awareness and attracting other funds and supporters.
The initial kickstarter campaign therefore tries to generate 250.000$ for research instead of the whole 15million$. This is still a lot, but considering the public accessibility and the fact that new york harbors a world wide attraction it is realistic and met his goals.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/694835844/pool-tile-by-tile
prodigy network
Bogota tower, initiated by 'prodigy network', is an example of moving outside of existing crowdfunding structures to realise architectural projects on a scale far outside of regular possibilities. By creating a huge marketing campaign and project identity stating
https://www.prodigynetwork.com/default.aspx
Seattle: Neighbourhood Matching Fund
http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/nmf/
treshold
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
main problems
- exclusive.
- limited demand.
- either-/or principal.
- trade of
theoretical solutions
- research thoroughly
- use niches
- initiate urban experiments
examples
catchment
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
main problems
- Reach mostly limited locally
- Only exceptional cases generate outsiders interest.
- smaller reach> more participation per person needed.
potential solutions
- Kampagne im ersten Schritt bewusst Lokal auslegen.
- Klare definition des Wertes für Aussenstehende. Vermittlung!
- Geographie realistisch ausloten
- Netzwerk gründen.
- Marke statt Gebäude > Identifikation > Wachstum
- Produktion im Produkt > Mehrwert.
- Crowdsourcing statt funding.
examples
approval
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
main problems
- Finanziert heist nicht genehmigt!
- Öffentliche/ Behördliche Interessen
potential solutions
- Aufklärung über Ablauf und nötige Genehmigungen.
- Einbindung in festgelegten Prozess
- Nutzung definierter Netzwerke zur Überwindung der Hürden.(Macht)
examples
longlevity
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
main problems
- lasting responsibility
- subsequent use
- who carries lasting costs? maintainance? renovation?
- Recycling possibilities?
potential solutions
- Nachnutzungen mit einplanen
- Temporär und recyclebar bauen
- Management und Nutzung von Anfang an einkalkulieren.
examples
Conclusions
what can we learn from this article?<b
What seems to become clear during this research is, that there are a lot of different and often very creative solutions one can learn from. Even though one often has to deal with what for example 'brickstarter' described as a 'first mover disadvantage' there are lessons to be learned and the more we try to distribute them the more this
Outlook
how could the future of crowdfunded architecture look like?
