Cities, complex as they are, require a sum total approach for planning, management, and growth.

A sum total approach* shall help city administration to gain a macro level and multidisciplinary perspective while leading to integrated approach and strategies.

*The sum total approach here essentially may imply macro-level and multidisciplinary approach but the meaning and modality go far beyond.

Distinctive characteristics of urban affairs at present, in an encompassing sense-

☑️Legacy and emerging challenges (and awareness)
☑️Transitioning demographic traits and shifting collective (community) consciousness
☑️Increasingly aggravated climate and weather events (and awareness, voice)
☑️Unprecedented technological opportunities (emergence, pace, unfathomable outcome)
☑️Unprecedented emergence of enterprise ecosystem (numbers, pace, heterogeneity, scale)
☑️Unprecedented participatory approach within and amidst different spheres (public, private…)
☑️City administrations demonstrating unprecedented internal knowledge and specialization
☑️Unprecedented acknowledgment and focus on innovation within the public sector
☑️Repository of pilot testbed learnings
☑️Cascading localized effects of geo-political and economic turbulence

Changes and shifts at many levels and within many spheres which are happening in this decade and soon in the proceeding years, with cities at its center stage, are not even comparable to past century combined, except key milestones like consolidation of industrialization, globalization, the emergence of computers, and the internet. Truly unprecedented, what we see today.

It's not just an unprecedented time, for cities and city administrations, but also a poised time for them calling for resurgence, given the access to a vast body of accumulated universal knowledge; previously unimaginable (still) emerging, accessible, and market-ready technological tools; a (growing) ecosystem to support, test and realize utopian visions; previously unwitnessed level of specialization, interwinding web and shared aspirations of stakeholder, among others.

Amidst all these changes and shifts, a whole new governance approach to planning, managing, and growth strategy is required for cities, with city administrations being in an ever more prominent role. Ironically despite quite a bit of exceptions, emerging examples and proof of concepts; we still see the majority of urban governance responses that are quick-fix and fragmented, under the weight of decades and centuries of inertia - living budget to budget, solving problems department by department, battling to match demand and supply, focusing on tenure to tenure ect.

🤹‍♂️What may, not only help city administrations, but also rather unavoidable, is to adopt a sum total approach to look at problems that each city is confronting and opportunities that each one beholds.

The best thing a city administration can do to innovate at a faster rate is to reduce the threshold criteria for service procurement, and dilute the gatekeeping arrangements

The best thing a city administration can do to innovate at a faster rate is to reduce the threshold criteria for service procurement, making it more inclusionary, and dilute the gatekeeping arrangements to make way for fresh ideas.

From a service provider's perspective, innovation is less of a function of organizational critical mass, period of market existence, and proof of concept, and more about organizational agility, ideation, and their ability to experiment.

Especially in the urban innovation space, where certain approaches are being tried for the first time, certain concepts are being tested based on inconclusive literary evidence, and certain technologies are being embraced while still nascent and years behind their known lifecycle performance.

The public procurement framework, in its current shape, is structured enough to attract good service providers while ensuring transparency and accountability; but exclusionary enough to miss out on some of the best ones out there.

City administrations must move away from self-limiting prophecies of many kinds, whether procedural, statutory, or simply comfort of familiarity. What is also required is to develop a risk appetite, to embrace the innovation.

To start embracing innovation as a habit, city administrations-

✅Should develop a small-scale virtual or hybrid sandbox environment, to invite and allow all kinds of concepts, ideas, and approaches, with a range and hierarchy of actors. A place where failing is permissible.

✅Should develop an unparalleled, multipronged feedback and idea gateway.

✅Should use their discretionary power to test the minimum viable idea, sometimes out-of-turn, and with or without a mandate.

✅Continuous and frequent learning from test outcomes should directly feed into urban and sectoral policies via a special and fast route.

✅Should use their discretionary power to allocate a nominal fund and resources to realize the above. It’s also possible that some of the following may emerge from the above activities, like new and innovative sources of revenue, new forms of public-private partnership, and new business models.

Deviating from the norm and taking risks are not familiar themes in conventional urban governance, but those cities that develop a risk-taking aptitude will lead the way in urban innovation. There are known examples of cities, regions, and countries that have taken risks to test innovative concepts, and approaches for the first time, with acclaimed success, more should join the league or develop their own pathways. Resources, skills, and community support shall follow.

Author: Anoop Jha
Founder, Urban Tenets
Website: https://urbantenets.nl/