IN-PERSON: Livable Cities – New York

Abstract

In this paper I present the concept of eudaimonic well-being and argue for its relevance for urban research and the development of public space interventions, illustrating the discussion with empirical examples of urban agriculture projects. For the Ancient Greeks, eudaimonia denoted the actualization of our innermost potentials, a rewarding and fulfilled human life, which was necessarily one lived in accordance with virtue – excellences of character and understanding. Accordingly, the concept of eudaimonic well-being (human flourishing) needs to be clearly distinguished from the concept of hedonic well-being (or experienced well-being) related to the frequency and intensity of emotional experiences that make a person’s life pleasant or unpleasant. Human flourishing is not about positive emotional experiences (which usually have a transitory nature), but about the fulfillment/actualization of one’s potentials, perception of meaningfulness of one’s life, growth. By addressing the theme of eudaimonic well-being in cities I contribute to a growing discussion on the relationship between the built environment and quality of urban life. This research typically focuses on the range of pathways through which the built environment may affect human well-being, not so much on the operationalization of well-being. The concept of subjective well-being (SWB) commonly used in this field is usually taken as unproblematic, defined in terms of the personal evaluation of quality of life, as opposed to objective (economic) well-being measured by quantitative indicators such as income. I argue that this conceptualization is not satisfactory and we need to pay more attention towards the distinction between eudaimonic and hedonic well-being in cities, as these two concepts carry different sets of priorities for the development of urban interventions. This research was conducted within the project Cultivating Public Space, funded by the Research Council of Norway.