Architecture operates almost exclusively by way of client-based relationships. This actually sets the profession apart from other industries, making an architect or urban designer unable to practice without the aid of someone with deeper pockets and empty properties. This is of course largely due to the financial gravity of buildings, the need for intensive resources, and specific conditions for its very existence, naturally limiting the capacity of a profession that is unable to operate autonomously.
It is very rare to witness the creation of a project on an architect’s own accord or in any manner that doesn’t involve a wealthy patron. Much of our modern conception of design is still predicated on the Medici-inspired model that — by and large — designs are commissions. This obviously slants the purpose of the design and production heavily in favor of personal preference only on behalf of the client and a few other factors come into play. As a result, architectural outcomes frequently fall short when it comes to the expectations of a designer. Buildings are not nearly as well crafted, impactful, and forward thinking as designers would want them to be. Most importantly, practicing this way is largely at odds with public interests as we explored briefly in our previous posts about global accountability.
Recently, however, there has been a surge of community-powered tools that have allowed us to challenge the notion of what a building is for and what it could possibly achieve. Enter — Crowdfunding. During the last decade, crowdfunding has taken on prohibitively high costs for product or project support and decentralized funding across hundreds to sometimes thousands of individuals. This has allowed new companies to form, new creative campaigns to materialize, and yes, even new architecture to take shape where there was no singular-client demand.
The effect from a startup perspective is tremendous. Initiatives and ideas that would typically have required significant initial capital can suddenly amass an army of waiting customers even before anything hits the shelves and before any of the necessitous hurdles of registering a business, finalizing production or distribution, etc. The same can be said for a building on a crowdfunding campaign, introducing a major step in democratizing the highly insulated building development space. This is undoubtedly a direction needed in the design space where the dependence on singular clients prevents us from creating the most needed amenities and public programs.
Today, we’ll be exploring some of the past examples and attempts at large-scale crowdfunding, both to recognize the major benefits of crowd-based development and the severe limitations of the current platforms today.
Projects for the People
When you search for the best examples of public architecture on Kickstarter, Indiegogo, and others, you’ll be met with an interesting medley of initiatives. Some are experiments by established design firms, some are unique collaborations, and some are even completely grassroots in an attempt to install something unexpected and only locals would have the insight (and courage) to push for. All-in-all, the common thread through all these efforts are projects that the stewards feel are needed in the community.
Undoubtedly the most famous example of this is the + Pool (Plus Pool), which ran two successful Kickstarter campaigns (over $300,000) and has raised even more in private donations. The young team put forth the previously unthinkable — a public pool situated in New York City’s East River that would purify the surrounding water for internal use. Brilliantly, the design team’s go-to strategy to source support for a public project from the public. One notable reward for backing the project was the ability to engrave one of the 70,000+ tiles with your name or personal short message. More information can be found on their website.
Crowdfunding for buildings and projects that require long-term development is still fairly new and in the experimental realm for much of the architectural profession. It is important to note that there has still yet to be a successful campaign that ran the full gamut from property acquisition to completed construction.
As a response, more specialized crowdfunding platforms are entering the space including IOBY and Spacehive which take on a more specialized stance on local projects. Their structures are more clearly oriented to support non-profit and communal projects, incorporating services like facilitating tax-deductible donations and fiscal sponsorship. Again, these are major strides in opening up the market for wider engagement, broader support, and financial capacities that simply did not exist for a majority of endeavors.
Not Built to Last
Despite all of this, and the fact that a clear precedent has been set for an alternative business model for design and development, crowdfunded buildings and urban assets have not caught on and have seen relatively little rise on major platforms. Even collaborative campaigns with some major name recognition fail to follow-through with funding and project completion. In comparison, product runs continue to break all-time highs as Kickstarter becomes the defacto way to both fundraise and advertise pre-market innovation.
There are a few major qualities that prevent public design campaigns to last and succeed -
- One-Time Contributions
The transactions on crowd-funding platforms are straightforward — contribute a financial tier and receive a reward or recognition of some kind. This can be a single dollar for an online ‘thank-you’ to hundreds for a special-edition product for most other crowdfunds. This exchange from the user’s side is purely financial and can only be done once. Long-term campaigns, similar to non-profit donations, need to be able to source form their supporters repeatedly or in some other sustained way. One contribution, no matter how large, is simply not enough.
- Short-Term Single Campaigns
Most of the aforementioned mainstream platforms have limits on the number of days that a campaign can run, usually hitting a 60-day maximum. Initiatives have to race against the clock to amass as many commitments as possible or at least hit a qualifying goal to access the funds. This naturally pushes the platform to be catered towards individual products and nothing of a longer scope. It also doesn’t suit projects that have more speculative timelines and are subject to change along the way.
It’s also very rare to see repeat campaigns that attempt to broaden the success of previously successful one. The + Pool was a rare case, deciding to do an additional crowdfund after their first run barely garnered $40,000.
- A Business Model for a Business Model
With the popularity of crowdfunding platforms today, Kickstarter and Indiegogo have all but transformed into full marketing platforms for young projects. Everyone is competing for consumer dollars and the preparation needed to launch a campaign alone is a campaign in itself. The bar is raised each day and with the adjacent implications of running a fundraise — social media, general marketing, community updates, preparing the rewards, etc., as a result, these platforms are becoming less welcoming to evergreen project ideas.
BLDing Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger
There’s a great deal of explored territory when it comes to crowd-funding for long-term and large-scale development projects. It isn’t unfeasible to source millions in production budgets from thousands of supporters around the world. Now, the question becomes how we incentivize and engage that global audience into particular types of long-standing endeavors.
That’s exactly what we’re working towards. Our team is striving to set parameters for BLDG BLOX that builds further upon the economic foundation of financial contributions for brief campaigns and establish a more extensive approach to crowdfunding. We want the crowd to help ensure the longevity of the project and claim more intimate ownership of its success and sustainability.
Most important of all, we have yet to have a global building economy that allows citizens to earn partial ownership. We’re not just talking about finite perks that come with a Paypal payment. Sure, there are investment platforms that allow us to turn a bit of profit from collective investments, but nothing that suitably allows us to commit ourselves into built work alongside our funds. Creating the first global and democratic building economy that allows visionaries to materialize and distribute new urban value is one of our mainstay ambitions.
Much of our discussion here overlaps the concerns of the donation economy we outlined a few weeks ago and echoes the concerns of contributions based on traditional money. Like donations, the modern practice of crowdfunding has painted itself into a corner and disallows the nurturing of more complex, impactful, and long-term public-facing endeavors. What we’re aiming for today is less of a one-way transaction.
As always, let us know what you think! We’ll be following up soon with a list of past crowdfunded ‘buildings’ as well.
Website: bldgblox.io
Twitter: @bldg_blox
Mailing List: Link
Contact: hello@bldgblox.io
