OpenIDEO is an open innovation platform. Join our global community to solve big challenges for social good. Sign up, Login or Learn more

Occupy All Streets. (“99%” + “1%” + G*)

Amalgamate, through corwdsourcing, resources from the “1%” (funding, experience) + resources from the “99%” (drive, creativity, work) + resources from Government (oversight, security, services).

Photo of Saúl Lederman
5 4

Written by

What has become quite obvious in 2011 is the great divide that permeates the world between the “1%” with most of the money and the other “99%”. What has not been extensively evaluated is how to convert this divide into a positive bond. If managed correctly, revitalizing a city could be a perfect project to foster cooperation that would benefit all.

Occupy All Streets project (OAS).

1. Select, through crowdsourcing, the revitalization location based on the criteria discovered in this step of the process

2. Invite all major designers, urban planners and the general public to an open bidding process (just like openIDEO) to be selected as the master designer of the project. This master design will become a general framework that will come to life with the individual elements that will be created by the 99%+1%+Government.

3. With a selected and approved framework, generate another crowdsourcing and bidding process to generate ideas and solutions for each of the elements of the master framework. Consolidate partnerships between the “99%”, the “1%” and government.

Government – Benefits: Growth, city renewal, future revenue. Provide: security, services and tax incentives.

“1%” – Benefits: Tax breaks, future revenues, community involvement. Provide: Investment, experience, networking.

“99%” – Benefits: Work, patrimony. Provide: Creativity, works, drive.

Attachments (1)

5 comments

Join the conversation:

Comment
Photo of Saúl Lederman

I do agree with Johnny and Brad, the only purpose for the nomenclature used was to drive a point based on the recent events taking place worldwide. The intended idea is to highlight the differences in stimuli or incentives that would compel different groups to act for the benefit of the 100%. The 1% would more properly be referred to as founders, angel investors, venture backers... And a clear set of incentives should be targeted specifically for each group, be it tax breaks for the investors, recognition, participation on a board that drives the project froward, etc.

Photo of DeletedUser

DeletedUser

I like this concept very much. However, it seems like the conventional model is for wealthy individuals and philanthropies (the "1%") to play the role of funder for urban placemaking projects. I wonder if the distinctions between "99%" and "1%" are even necessary. Wouldn't it be interesting if, alternatively, the revitalization projects were both selected by the "1000%" and funded by the "100%" through fundraising platforms like Kickstarter?

Photo of Saúl Lederman

I do agree with Johnny and Brad, the only purpose for the nomenclature used was to drive a point based on the recent events taking place worldwide. The intended idea is to highlight the differences in stimuli or incentives that would compel different groups to act for the benefit of the 100%. The 1% would more properly be referred to as founders, angel investors, venture backers... And a clear set of incentives should be targeted specifically for each group, be it tax breaks for the investors, recognition, participation on a board that drives the project froward, etc.

Photo of Johnny Falla

This is really great, Saul! Timely too! And right on track through partnerships as I see it.
One piece of advice--when working with the 'other' team, let's see if we can move away from labels. The 1% know where they are in terms of income, but that doesn't actually define them in most cases. These folks are just as proud of the communities where they come from just like you and me--and they really don't like all of the baggage that comes with the 1% label (eek, hope nobody freaks out that I'm standing up for the 1%...). But you've already got it in the sense that we can't get this done without them. Philanthropic capital is the rarest form of capital out there, and often times the most valuable because of its potential for leverage. Just wanted to encourage you to think of a way that's inclusive of this small, but critical group of folks (but also not pandering!). Tight rope to balance, but let's do it!

Photo of Meena Kadri

Great visualisation, Saul! Perhaps you might upload it as a PDF as well (You can make updates to your entry at any time using the Update Entry button up there on the right. You'll see the Add File button within the submission form) That way folks can check out the fine print on the image captions you've put together if they're keen.

We're anticipating discussions to flourish here and your ideas to evolve. Here's an example of how built up ideas can get over the course of a challenge: http://www.openideo.com/open/localfood/winners-announced/public-kitchen/ Let's bring on the builds and spell out the specifics!