Territorial intelligence, or how to take advantage of the potential of the knowledge society in favour of sustainable development
Political decentralizing processes, the concern for the sustainability of economic growth models in a globalized world, and the emergence of the knowledge society bring along a new way of focusing on the problems relating to development.
On the one hand, the concern for life quality in the present and future generations, brings into focus the territorial (vs. global) dimension of development, since there is growing awareness of the fact that not only are benefits generated in global markets, but also that it is on the local scale that the social and environmental costs of the models based on economic profitability are determined, thus affecting directly the unbalanced distribution of the population’s “welfare” and “better life”. On the other hand, focus on the territory allows a better perception of the multidi-mensionality and complexity of problems, highlighting two important issues. Firstly, the need for solutions to be tackled comprehensively and co-ordinately by all the actors involved in the territory (participation and the creation of tools to in-stitutionalise this participation emerge here as a democratic demand, but also, to the same extent, as an indispensable factor to guarantee the efficiency of decentralizing processes). Secondly, the lack of pluridisciplinary knowledge and learning available to tackle these complex problems comprehensively, and also the lack of project prospecting, design and evaluation tool kits really adapted or adaptable to the needs of the territory.
The concept, methods and practices of territorial intelligence of the European Network of Territorial Intelligence (ENTI) appear in an attempt to solve these par-ticipatory and scientific-technical deficits in territorial projects. Thus, based on the principles of multidimensionality, partnership and participation inspired by Com-munity programmes from the 1980s, and making use of concepts, methods and tools which are thorough from a scientific and technical point of view, territorial intelligence aims at promoting participatory processes which mobilize the knowl-edge, expertise and experience of the actors’ partnerships involved in one territorial project.
As proposed in the article by Jean-Jacques Girardot (coordinator of the ENTI), territorial intelligence transcends the concept of economic intelligence, widening its scope, focusing not only on the economic efficacy and efficiency of the devel-opment model, but also including all the dimensions which affect sustainable de-velopment (social, political, cultural, environmental). The relational aspect is of great importance; as a result, territorial intelligence aims to introduce processes for territorial actors to harmonise economic, social and environmental objectives and coordinate their actions, in short, to promote the territorial democratic governance of sustainable development. After all, “what is territorial intelligence but the intel-ligence of living together in a given space and time?” .
When all these elements come into play, issues such as local culture and social capital, which were traditionally considered in a more tangential way and darkened by the omnipresence of the economic element, gain prominence and stand as key factors in the resolution of territorial problems. Territorial intelligence emerges here as a tool from which social capital can be generated, but taking into account, as suggested by Natale Ammaturo, that its implementation requires certain attitude and local culture already existing which can distinguish between “quality” and “quantity”. Otherwise, territorial intelligence projects, also as stated by the author, would be like “cathedrals in the dessert”, magnificent buildings without people to visit them.
The importance of this cultural foundation emerges again in Andrea Barbieri and Emiliana Magnone’s work, who, with reference to the debate in Italy, examine its impact in terms of proximity to the citizen, equity and quality of a decentraliz-ing policy. Their analysis takes us back to participation: given that different fields of action may require different territorial demarcations for efficacy and efficiency reasons, it is institutions, organizations and actors very different in nature which finally get involved in the local field, so that the only way to provide coherence in the territory is partnership work. However, the authors suggest, the implementation of participatory processes requires an initial “political, civil and economic liter-acy”.
The article by Giovanna Truda also insists on the importance of participation, in relation with urban projects in degraded districts, focusing on the concept of terri-torial intelligence as a tool to link institutions, territory, population and services in the organization of the spaces which favour the emergence of collective life and which are the basis for the creation of the identity and culture of a neighbourhood. The cultural change implied by a more participatory life may significantly affect the conditions under which the life quality of the neighbours was developed, modi-fying individual courses in a more efficient way.
However, as Tullia Sacchieri writes, it is citizen participation, and not only that at the level of coordination and cooperation of territorial actors and policy-makers, which is really necessary to foster a genuine political transformation developing the principles of good governance (openness, participation, accountability, effi-ciency and consistency). Especially when complex welfare problems related to in-equality affect the quality of life of the population, the participation of the needs holders in the definition of the problems becomes part of the solution, since it means not only a more realistic diagnosis, but also a greater involvement of the participants in its resolution. The author discusses the challenges that the creation of spaces for interaction and methodologies genuinely participatory in which the needs and solutions can be expressed poses both to those responsible political as well as to social researchers.
On the other hand, from a scientific point of view, territorial intelligence is a network science, nourished by pluridisciplinary knowledge, a genuinely applied science, based on experimentation, on trial and error. A science which puts its theo-ries and methods of analysis at the service of sustainable development actors and which, in turn, is nourished by the experiences, errors and successes of the action in order to advance in knowledge and methods.
As shown by the articles by Serge Ormaux and Cyril Masselot, territorial intel-ligence modifies the role that certain objects of study have had in several disci-plines, giving rise to new approaches and favouring a fruitful field for reflection and for inspiring advances in the theorising and modelling of many traditional sci-entific disciplines.
Ormaux shows that under the approach of territorial intelligence, and transcend-ing its traditional role as the arena for actors’ activities, the landscape is a commu-nication tool for territorial development projects. Thus it becomes a privileged par-ticipating tool on which those involved can share their views to discuss the various interpretations of the landscape around them, and from that exchange (of the dif-ferent landscapes where actors live but referred to the same objective reality), de-fine the objectives of their projects for the future. As a result, it is necessary to sci-entifically consider theories and models which allow a better understanding of the landscape phenomenon.
From another point of view, the work by Masselot shows that the Catalyse method developed by the ENTI can become a very favourable field of analysis for information and communication sciences, since the experiences to which this method is applied are situations of information and communication in which the actors of a partnership jointly convert information into meaning. The analysis from this approach allows the emergence of common languages and the way in which they make possible intra and extra communication within the group to be detected, promoting the rise of a new shared knowledge and thus favouring governance and shared decision making.
From a more general point of view, the article by Blanca Miedes, closing the is-sue, proposes that territorial intelligence can be understood as a new science-society alliance, a process in which science is directly involved in the resolution of the problems that most directly affect society and which works side by side with the territorial actors in a process of mutual feedback. It is a responsible science, an actor itself rather than a simple spectator, which works in favour of the governance of sustainable development.
Bibliography
Corbineau B., Intelligence territoriale et societe en réseau. Les Mediatheques de proximité, portails de la connaissance, in «Journée sur les systèmes d’information élaborée, 4e Tic & Territoire: quels développements?», île Rousse, 2005.
