Simon Nielsen 1/19/23 Simon Nielsen 1/19/23

Creating a New Heart and Soul for Midtown, NYC

Social Life Project has written an extraordinary reflection on the future of Central Business Districts. Ethan Kent, co-author and executive director of PlacemakingX, introduces the text as an open call to reinvent US Central Business Districts to be Central Social Districts.

“The placemaking movement,” Kent says, “in many ways grew out of work in Midtown NYC in the 70s and 80s by William H. Whyte, Fred Kent and Project for Public Spaces, who then spread their successful approaches with Rockefeller Center, Bryant Park, the Port Authority Bus Terminal and eventually Times Square, to help bring disinvested Central Business Districts to life around the country and globally.

Once again Central Business Districts are facing a challenge to compete as places people want to be. Offering an inspiring and detailed plan, the Social Life Project says it's time to take social life-led public space strategies to a new level, and start again with Midtown Manhattan.”

Read the introduction below and follow the link to read the full text.

By Social Life Project

Introduction: Midtown Manhattan is in trouble

What is arguably the world’s best-known office district – and a symbol of New York’s vitality to the world – is at risk of losing its lifeblood: its office workers. Post-COVID work changes mean that many office workers don’t have to come to Midtown, and improved work environments that are closer to where they live – whether at home or in new offices along the West Side Manhattan or Brooklyn waterfronts – offer better places without the commute. Commercial office and retail vacancies are stubbornly high, and foot traffic is down.

This is a problem for Midtown because without sufficient numbers of people shopping in the stores, relaxing in the social spaces, and visiting the landmarks, a place gradually dies. It falls into a state of inactivity and neglect and underperforms in ways that are necessary for a city to thrive such as by attracting visitors, residents and business. With Midtown being the heart of one of the greatest cities in the world, we should not just sit back and watch as this happens.

Owners of office buildings are talking about converting to other uses, including residential. The ones that are succeeding have rethought and re-designed their buildings and added amenities. Some have also created flexible, vibrant, and people-friendly spaces on the inside of their buildings. We see an opportunity to do the same outside of these Midtown buildings, especially along major avenues, at intersections, crosstown streets and along 59th Street and Central Park. Restoring a sense of place draws workers and other people to enjoy the vast resources that Midtown offers.

Read the full text here.

Simon Nielsen 1/16/23 Simon Nielsen 1/16/23

The future of villages lies in the hands of rural activators

“One of the critical objectives of current EU policy is to maintain lively rural areas. Rural activators are the only ones able to change these areas' fate. However, the desire to restore the rural areas should lay to all of us since we benefit from it. Rural activators face various socio‑economic pressures that make their work hard to maintain.” Justyna Turek, CEO of HOLIS, looks into a possible future for rural life.

By Justyna Turek, CEO of Holis

Around 30% of the EU's population lives in rural areas. Between 2020 and 2030, rural populations are projected to increase by only 1 per cent, compared with 8 percent in urban areas, which means that rural areas will continue facing their already existing challenges like demographic changes, poverty, and a lack of access to basic facilities. These regions risk their inhabitants abandoning the villages, and those who remain don't have adequate tools to regain their agency or rebuild interest in this place. In 2021, the European Commission adopted its communication "A long-term vision for the EU's rural areas – Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040". This apparent need to support the rural activators so the rural region can flourish caused the beginning of the project Open School for Village Hosts (founded by Erasmus+).

“Rural areas are the fabric of our society and the heartbeat of our economy. They are a core part of our identity and our economic potential. We will cherish and preserve our rural areas and invest in their future”– Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.

It's never the people's problems. It's a situation problem. Holis has marked all the projects we have been working on with this approach. It became incredibly relevant at the Open School for Village Host project since, to reverse the system (situation), we need to support the people first. The rural activists need the most attention, not yet another house to build or a highway to make. Through this project, we want to build agency within the people and the community by investing in them. Rural activators with the right tools can change the situation/system more than outsiders, who often do not know the context and community.

Holis, together with other partners, aims to support and train rural activators through an innovative training program that proposes creating a new core of competencies that benefits European villages. With this project, we also aim "do our part" (The Flight of the Hummingbird story) and reverse (or at least try!) global issue as rural depopulation step by step. Rural depopulation affects regions where the rural exodus outstrips natural growth, reducing the total number of inhabitants to a critical level and causing the ageing of demographic structures. The Shrinking Rural Regions policy brief shows that Europe's demography became a significant policy challenge. A shrinking population has become the typical course for numerous rural regions as agriculture is restructured and the population (especially employment) moves to urban areas.

We stumbled upon this topic with Holis' participants at Holis Summer School in 2019, where we worked on revitalising economic and social fabrics in the Odemira region, Portugal. Then we discovered the depth of this challenge and got close to the rural activators who were almost willing to fight for their villages to stay alive. Small villages around Europe and the world suffer from accompanying problems that often are inseparable from depopulation. The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic amplified it even more. For example, in America, the effects of the pandemic on rural populations cause unemployment, downsized life satisfaction, and cause serious mental health problems, not to mention the economic outlook.

Nevertheless, several social and rural enterprises are already generating positive social impact in those areas, changing the rural regions' perspective and future. A common feature in all these positive experiences is a skilled person based in the community, who identifies opportunities, connects local actors, and continuously develops projects. Such superheroes are already existing and might recognise them (article about the rural activators). Although the description of a rural activator, called a 'Village Host' for this project is new, local and regional work is already being done by local pioneers, social innovators, and enterprising local officials.

We believe that the rural regions' future is not yet decided. We believe that the future lies in the hands of these rural activators. By supporting them, we give them the right tools to sustain the development of the villages and the regions. At the same time, we will be able to promote a new economic model to be potentially applied to all inner areas and small villages of Europe that will foster social innovation, inclusion and valorization of local heritage. The most relevant aspect is the sustainability and transferability of the identified cooperation model and training solutions. Open School for Village Hosts project seek to reach out to adjacent projects in Europe and beyond whose work and expertise overlap with ours.

"Village Hosts bring new social, economic and ecological life to small villages and their local economy. In terms of public policy, the Open School for Village Hosts creates 'public goods in the form of social cohesion, public health, territorial development, food sovereignty, farmer livelihoods, learning, innovation, and biodiversity" - John Thackara, the expert supporting the program.

What's next? Holis and Open School for Village Hosts partners have been busy for the last couple of months. We have been researching, collecting data, and conducting focus groups and interviews with experts o capacity building, the future of the skills and rural development. Now, we are creating a test training module out of these findings that will be used to teach rural activators new skills. At the end of 2023, we aim to deliver outcomes as a practical platform, handbook, manifesto, and additional materials to support Village Hosts' development. What is most important in this work is remembering the human element, which is crucial here to make this program succeed. To do it, we invite you - dear readers and Holis supporters - to provide us with your feedback, knowledge or/and opinion on this topic. Maybe you know an already existing rural activator? If yes, please put us in contact.

The Village Hosts website

The partners of the program: Casa Netural, Materahub, ELISAVA University School of Design and Engineering of Barcelona, CDOP, Radošā partnerība, KobieTy Łódź and We Are Holis. Special advisor John Thackara

Simon Nielsen 1/4/23 Simon Nielsen 1/4/23

Building Community In The Lonely Century

“(…) Loneliness erodes the prophylactic power of community for which no health care professional can substitute. With the pandemic, we saw how people who thought of themselves as members of a community were more likely to care for one another and act responsibly towards one another. Likewise, community can have a major influence on social determinants of health such as the physical environment, housing, education, access to food and mutual support.” Jim Diers, community activator, reads an essential book on loneliness and suggests comprehensive solutions.

By Jim Diers, community activator

The Lonely Century by Noreena Hertz is a must-read for those who care deeply about community, health or democracy. Hertz describes the growing epidemic of loneliness which is another way of talking about the erosion of community. She has compiled vast evidence linking loneliness to a decline in the health of individuals and democracy. Most important, Hertz identifies causes of loneliness and recommends solutions.

With an extensive bibliography and more than 900 detailed footnotes, the book synthesizes much of the research and literature on loneliness and community. Hertz builds on this with her own stories and observations. With this review, I will highlight some of the book’s key findings. I will also expand on Hertz’ work by identifying additional impacts of loneliness and advocating more comprehensive solutions.

The book begins by citing research showing how pervasive loneliness has become in our society. Even in a pre-Covid survey of the United States, three in five adults considered themselves lonely. More than one in five millennials say that they have no friends at all. Hertz is based in England, but she shows similar findings for countries all over the world.

The health impacts of loneliness are devastating. Hertz cites studies showing that lonely individuals…

have a 29% higher risk of coronary heart disease
have a 32% higher risk of stroke
have a 64% higher risk of dementia
are ten times more likely to be depressed
have a 30% higher risk of premature death

According to Hertz, “The research shows that loneliness is worse for our health than not exercising, as harmful as being an alcoholic and twice as harmful as being obese. Statistically, loneliness is equivalent to smoking fifteen cigarettes a day.”

Hertz doesn’t mention it, but loneliness erodes the prophylactic power of community for which no health care professional can substitute. With the pandemic, we saw how people who thought of themselves as members of a community were more likely to care for one another and act responsibly towards one another. Likewise, community can have a major influence on social determinants of health such as the physical environment, housing, education, access to food and mutual support.

Hertz also fails to note the key role that community plays in caring for the environment, preventing crime, and responding to emergencies. Thus, it isn’t just individuals who suffer from loneliness. The corresponding breakdown of community has dire consequences for society as a whole.

One societal impact that Hertz does focus on is the threat to our democracy. She describes how lonely individuals often display anger, hostility, a lack of empathy, and a belief that others don’t care about them or their opinions. Yet, like everyone else, they crave belonging. Such individuals can be fodder for aspiring dictators as Hannah Arendt learned from her experience as a Jew in Nazi Germany. Hertz quotes from Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism: “(Totalitarianism) bases itself on loneliness . . . The chief characteristic (of its adherents) is not brutality and backwardness, but their isolation and lack of normal social relationships . . . It is through surrendering their individual selves to ideology that the lonely rediscover their purpose and self-respect.”

Hertz identifies numerous causes of loneliness. These include the usual suspects such as smartphones, social media, contactless shopping, urbanization, racism and the loss and degradation of public spaces. She describes at length how changes to the workplace resulted in a global survey showing that 40% of office workers feel lonely at their jobs. Contributing factors include the move away from shared meals and a greater reliance on technology. Hertz claims that open-plan offices have counter-intuitively caused workers to withdraw socially from their colleagues. Now the pandemic-induced trend to work from home has greatly exacerbated loneliness in the workforce.

The ideology of neoliberal capitalism as championed by politicians ranging from Reagan to Clinton receives much of the blame for the current epidemic of loneliness. Hertz contends that the policies and practices of government and business alike have incentivized the pursuit of self-interest rather than the common good and fostered an enormous and growing gap in incomes and wealth. “Neoliberalism has made us see ourselves as competitors not collaborators, hoarders not sharers, takers not givers, hustlers not helpers . . . (and created) an all about me selfish society in which people feel that they have to look after themselves because no one else will.”

I would add that government, business and other institutions foster loneliness when they focus on people solely as clients and customers with needs rather than as citizens with gifts. Recognizing that everyone has something to share and encouraging gift giving is basic to community. As more and more professionals do to and for rather than with community, there is less of a role for community itself. People come to think of themselves as individual taxpayers, clients or customers rather than as fellow community members. That’s a recipe for loneliness.

A related problem is the way in which institutions and their professionals are so specialized. The community has been disassembled and organized the way in which the institutions, professionals and their programs are organized. There are separate silos for youth, elders, immigrants, individuals with disabilities, those who are housing insecure, etc. You can’t build community in institutional silos. Ironically, I’ve found that the strongest communities tend to be in those places where there are the fewest professionals trying to help the community.

Nevertheless, we are social creatures and long to belong. Hertz shares incredible stories of the desperate measures people take to feel some connection whether that is renting a friend, developing a relationship with a robot, or as some lonely older women are doing in Japan, committing petty crimes in the hope of finding social connections in jail. There must be better solutions!

While government may have inadvertently eroded community, it can also help to strengthen it. Hertz suggests the following measures:

Move from neoliberalism to a more cooperative form of capitalism that works for society as well as the economy. Ensure full employment, workers’ rights, economic security and greater equity.
Regulate social media so that it is less addictive and so that its algorithms reward kindness over anger.
Give citizens a meaningful voice in government and the workplace.
Provide more funding for shared public spaces.
Initiate programs that bring diverse people together for conversation and/or community service.

I would add the following:

Focus government on those things that it is uniquely suited to do, support the community to do what it does best, and collaborate on those things best done together.
Focus municipal government on whole neighborhoods and communities and not simply on its separate silos.
Remove the red tape that makes it difficult to hold street parties, plant street trees, build playgrounds and take other community action.
Offer leadership training for citizens to help them be effective community builders.
Replicate Edmonton’s program of volunteer block connectors.
Support neighborhood-led planning as Hoogeveen and Peel en Maas have done so successfully in the Netherlands.
Engage neighborhood activists in working with the municipality to develop neighborhood strengthening strategies as Hamilton, Kitchener and London have done in Ontario.
Join hundreds of other cities around the world in replicating Seattle’s Neighborhood Matching Fund which provides a cash match for the neighbors’ volunteer time in support of community-initiated projects.

Hertz recognizes that community building can’t simply be a top-down initiative. She offers numerous suggestions of things that individuals can do to counter loneliness:

Devote more time to personal interactions and less to social media
Participate in local associations and events
Buy locally
Get to know your neighbors
Listen to others and practice empathy
Reach out to those who are lonely
Demand social justice

I would also urge individuals to focus on the principles of asset-based community development as popularized by John McKnight and John Kretzmann:

Start where you are – connect with your neighbors to act on shared interests by utilizing the unique skills, knowledge and other resources that everyone possesses.
Focus on the gifts of those we have labelled by their needs. People with labels such as homeless, disabled, at-risk, old, poor, etc. tend to be lonely. Yet, everyone has both gifts and needs. Community is about sharing one another’s gifts to meet one another’s needs.

We certainly can’t afford a century of loneliness. Let’s get busy building inclusive community.

Simon Nielsen 11/7/22 Simon Nielsen 11/7/22

Front Porch As An Intentional Gathering Place

“Our architecture and spaces tell a lot about our lifestyle and how we engage with our community. In Lahore, we see different types of front porches and thus different ways of connection and interaction within community. These modes of interaction together form the street life.” Peacemakers Pakistani examine a crucial element in the placemaking of Lahore and beyond.

By Peacemakers Pakistani

Front porch is a place to greet a neighbour, share bottle of water or a meal, encourage conversations (and yes those long goodbye conversations of desi aunties too) a place to sit in the shade of tree or a pergola, a place to celebrate and gather and have fun and also to be civically engaged as it connects our private spaces to public spaces. It is a frontier between our private homes and public spaces of neighbourhood. It reminds us of being a part of human community.

Our architecture and spaces tell a lot about our lifestyle and how we engage with our community. In Lahore, we see different type of front porches and thus different ways of connection and interaction within community. These modes of interaction together form the street life.

Let’s look at the famous street life of Walled City. The narrow roads and on street doors with no defined porches but a ‘thara’ (slab) connected to buildings base for sitting and interaction is provided. The ‘thara’ is the most used place for gathering and conversations among men living in the Walled City. And as streets are narrow and houses fronts are up close women are often seen or heard as communicating with each other behind their windows from houses across the street (what an interesting sight especially for the people used to living with a lawn buffer or 30 ft wide road as separation between houses).

This form of architectural or functional addition to a building is a welcoming opportunity for people to relax and have conversation with their neighbours and also strangers and also vendors. One of the reasons why Walled City environment feels safe regardless of uneducated or uncivilised boys and due to some good old men and natural surveillance (eyes on the street), their presence adds vibrancy to the street life. It’s these different forms of interaction that attracts the humans with social nature to spend time and appreciate the urban fabric of the Walled City.

Moving on and let’s talk about societies with small porches and front lawns (as by-laws requirement) with 30 ft wide road separating houses. The thara culture is not seen in other parts of the city but sometimes a bench in the front lawn is seen and utilised by people passing by to rest. It is also used by home owners to spend time and have conversation with friends. Sharing food items among neighbours is a common culture here because sharing is caring.

It is also common for a beggar to ask for help and that kind of compassionate exchange also happens through front porches. Buying items from vendors, meanwhile meeting a neighbour and having conversation on street is not something rare, it happens very often. The thing that keep these kind of streets alive are people walking to nearby grocery stores, finding public transport, beggars, vendors or friends that comes up to visit (conversations happening sometimes at gate or even from road to balcony)

There is another angle to the bigger societies with even larger roads approximately 60 ft to 80 ft width, with inner lawns as well and bigger homes. The social exchange happens but on a rare level. It is also about mindset and how people choose to live and interact with others. Vendors and beggars are also not allowed in such societies. The social exchange happens on front gate or in lawns, hardly seen on road or goes unnoticed due to wide roads and open space. Again, it depends upon how people choose to interact, but the streets and neighbourhoods like these are mainly silent and not very lively. The houses inside maybe loud and lively but streets are quiet.

The social exchange during current COVID19 was suspected to be different or not very likely to happen but it certainly happened as many livelihoods depended on them. People might have taken precautionary measures like masks and sanitisers and kept physical distance but social distance and daily practice of meeting and having conversations and seeking emotional support couldn’t be stopped here (the thara culture kept on).

People also shared food with their neighbours, yet again, because sharing is caring and delivery boys also delivered food to houses and families. Beggars also asked for help because that’s how they fed their families.

And here to mention an amazing practice done by Ms. Rukhsana Izhar, Founder of Rukh Foundation for providing cooked meals to needy people from her front porch. She had been doing it before COVID19 and she kept doing it during the crises. She practices SOP’s and educate people along the way as well (as you can see in the video below). A great example of how a woman leads. We must learn from her as Eid-ul-Adha is also coming and we might need to create such systems of interaction in order to provide meat to needy ones safely.

It’s just an example of how people can keep up their work and help others at any time just by adopting to current situations. I am truly proud to be a part of such community where an exchange of kindness, compassion and care is so common. Therefore, a porch is an intentional place for interaction.

One such success story by another lady, I would like to add here is by Ms. Robina Shakeel, Founder of Aabroo Educational Welfare Organization, who started teaching children of her maid in her car porch. And this passion and demand turned into one and then multiple schools and many children of uneducated parents. She is now running incredible systems to provide honour and healthy education to children. And remember it all started from a porch.

There might be multiple stories of inspiration and motivation from a small element of Architecture i.e. front porch. So pay attention and find out and discover more stories around you or create your own and acknowledge being a part of human community. And take care of your neighbours as it’s sunnah and they have rights over you. Adding vibrancy to your streets and neighbourhood through the process – that’s what placemaking is all about. You have the opportunity to interact and socialise, avail it whole-heartedly.

Simon Nielsen 10/21/22 Simon Nielsen 10/21/22

Basketcolor Project: Placemaking, art and play for resilient communities in Juarez, Mexico

“After the first waves of COVID-19, we observed how public spaces (streets, squares, parks) in various cities around the world began to become allies for both economic and sociocultural reactivation. From spaces for outdoor commerce to places of physical activity and recreation, of course, prioritizing the new rules of the game: social distancing, face masks and constant sanitization.” Miguel Mendoza and Nómada Estudio Urbano uses placemaking and a participatory approach to reactivate public space.

By Miguel Mendoza & Nómada Estudio Urbano

As a result of the pause in public life caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, people have had to develop new adaptation mechanisms in the way we approach our cities, communities and, above all, our public spaces.

Nowadays, it is said that we live in a "new normality". However, in a border city as complex as Juarez, Mexico, it is difficult to measure such normality.

For example, in Juarez it was not possible to experience safe confinement in the most critical times of the pandemic. The majority of the population had to be exposed to this new adversity in order not to lose their jobs and remain economically active.

After the first waves of COVID-19, we observed how public spaces (streets, squares, parks) in various cities around the world began to become allies for both economic and sociocultural reactivation. From spaces for outdoor commerce to places of physical activity and recreation, of course, prioritizing the new rules of the game: social distancing, face masks and constant sanitization.

Inspired by these urban adaptations, we began to map spaces in Juarez with the potential to be transformed into multifunctional temporary places for community reactivation processes. That's how we found an interesting common denominator: basketball courts in community parks.

Although Juarez has historically suffered from a deficit of public spaces and the existing parks need to improve their conditions, it is common to find preserved basketball courts in them. In general, the courts in community parks have become bastions of play and one of the most used infrastructures.

Based on these opportunity areas, the Basketcolor Project arose. This project aimed to use placemaking and asphalt art to make basketball courts flexible and adaptable public spaces where play and neighborhood activation coexist.

You may be wondering, "Is it possible to change the traditional context of a basketball court?" The answer is yes, as long as you understand the needs and wishes to be resolved around the space and its users. This is where placemaking and participatory design gain ground.

Through placemaking workshops and co-design, we worked with various communities to generate floor mural proposals that could provide the opportunity to also use courts as smart meeting spaces for activities such as flea markets, health fairs, open-air cinema and neighborhood committees. All this, without sacrificing the original purpose for play and recreation.

Throughout the first and second year of the pandemic, the Basketcolor Project allowed the activation of 6 multifunctional basketball courts. As the health situation improved in Juarez and once vaccination was accessible for all, the meaning of the project slowly migrated to the revitalization of courts for recreational use. Now, using placemaking and co-design to consolidate floor murals that make visible the identity and sense of appropriation of the community in which they are located.

Currently, the Basketcolor Project has activated 15 courts in various communities in Juarez and is perceived as a benchmark for citizen participation in the recovery of public spaces. Beyond being an urban art project, Basketcolor is today defined as a community placemaking project that seeks to enhance resilience and generate more humane and playful spaces that reflect the values and uniqueness of the people who inhabit them.

Simon Nielsen 10/18/22 Simon Nielsen 10/18/22

Public Space Is a Learning Place

“Any public space is a learning ground. We get to meet strangers and interact with them and learn something from them, we get to experience nature and all its glory and lessons, we get to experience and face different challenges as well. We get to meet people of different races and backgrounds and share the place with them without feeling any threat, and there's a chance of becoming a friend with them even if it's just a “salam dua friend" meaning someone you just greet on a daily basis.” Peacemakers Pakistani ask us to look around and cherish the shared learning of public space.

By Peacemakers Pakistani

The behavior of people in public spaces brings to light the issues that the nation or citizens are facing not only on surface level but on a deeper level as well.... If only one has time to focus, observe and analyze. After that when an issue is brought to surface one must try to help solve them in a compassionate manner instead of sitting there and criticize and complain about things. And what one must remember always, the change starts with one human, let that human be you!

So being an observer here is what I have to share with you....

1. We often observe intolerance and impatience in people on road, everyone wants to pass through first, not allowing other person to move ahead or waiting for their own turn. Well, "waiting??", what does that term mean! Unfortunately, we seem to be ignorant of this term. Here in Pakistan, it is sarcastically said "tu lang ja saadi kher" meaning "you can walk over us, we are okay with that". These kind of sarcastic remarks come from deep disappointment I believe and it is becoming our limited belief with time, unconsciously, which is not good. The reason being consumerism culture to me where everything is available at just one click that people have forgotten the habit of waiting for right time and instant gratification being one big disastrous mindset due to that as well. Also, the rat race in which everyone is rushing blindly.

So next time you are outside, observe.... Not only others but yourself as well.... Are you rushing? Are you part of the rat race everyone is? Is it hard for you to wait for your turn? How does it feel in your body? Where can you sense it within you? How is it showing up in your behavior? Then, observe in others, around you, how can you see it happening around you? Is it worth being a part of and keep on practicing daily? If not, what else would you like to practice daily so you may become that human who is tolerant and patient and going with the flow of nature. InshaAllah.

2. People have lost respect for each other including themselves. You can see it in the ways people treat each other on road or any other public space. The way they address each other, the name calling, the harassment cases particularly with girls/women, the bullying with boys, even the abusive behavior and language very frequently seen around. I find some signages and quotations on vehicles as disrespectful and sarcastic as well, there is no need for that but it is frequently seen because sense of humor is being misunderstood and an excuse for disrespect. I wonder why people have forgotten that respect is a fundamental need and moral value of a human being. Allah has given a human being great respect, why people have forgotten their value and position?

So, do you think that those who disrespect strangers would respect those at home? Do you know that the relationship we have with ourselves is what we reflect on the outside with others? How is your relationship with others? How do you treat others? How is your relationship with yourself? How do you treat yourself in times of tension and stress? How do you show yourself self respect? Is it all making sense to you?

3. I see adults (mainly homeless people and drug addicts I am referring to here) showcasing disgusting habits and activities in public and open spaces and living their lives as very discouraging and pitiful state, and then I wonder when I see children around them, (also homeless) not addicts yet but what else would they be if they see no good example around them? Children follow the steps of elders, what are they seeing, what are they copying? Unfortunately I have seen 2 children once mimicking how to smoke hiding from the elders, I have also seen children name calling and harassing girls older than them, I have also seen children laughing at lame jokes just like how elders would with different understanding and intention though, I have seen lot... I wish I was ignorant but I am not....

So what do you think how can this situation be minimized? Do these adults need to be schooled or these kids? What future do you see for them? What might be the cause of their homelessness and drug addiction? What would our kids be learning from them as they see them frequently on roads on daily basis? What mindset and behavior do we need to teach our children towards these people they encounter directly or indirectly? What could be our role as responsible citizens? Do share with me.

4. Leisure, rest and play are rights of all human beings. As we all work daily, either being a student or working person be at home or at office or any profession, the homemakers are included as well... But do we have time and space to rest play and have a leisure time? Is it for free? Are we given the opportunities to enjoy and rest? Are we availing those opportunities? I mainly see people, now, spending their free times in restaurants or in markets.... Consumerism alert! Spending money isn't my kind of rest, play or leisure activity, i mean spending money now would mean me being disturbed to earn money again for more free time or my responsibilities. For me that's double the pressure and stress. Isn't it true? For me, leisure walk on street or in the park that's more relaxing and relieving, the interaction with nature even for few minutes is a source of energy booster but I find it difficult because of the security concerns mainly due to lack of facilities and vehicles on road and yes creepy people lacking mannerism... But, why other people are not outside? I mean if there are more people out for rest and leisure wouldn't it feel secure, the natural surveillance would be such a great support. But do we have time for that, is it a priority for us? Why not? Is rat race and consumerism culture is again a culprit here? What do you think? Do you go out or not? Why yes or no?

5. Any public space a learning ground, we get to meet strangers and interact with them and learn something from them, we get to experience nature and all its glory and lessons, we get to experience and face different challenges as well. We get to meet people of different races and backgrounds and share the place with them without feeling any threat and there's a chance of becoming a friend with them even if it's just a salam dua friend meaning someone you only meet to greet and part ways (on daily basis) how amazing that is.... But for quite some time we haven't been allowed to be outside especially children and women to experience the outside world so we see lot of children and women lacking social skills and having self esteem issues because they weren't allowed to grow and fulfill their developmental needs. No wonder why our nation lack leaders...!

So I want to ask you now, what else have you been able to observe in public spaces around you and what other people behaviors teach you about the crisis in your country? What sort of crisis are there? I have only mentioned 5 but there are many that I have observed. What solution do you have to mitigate these crisis? Do you think if we reclaim our public spaces being a responsible citizen and being a better human (not just supposing that we are but becoming one) and set new examples rather good examples of how a society should behave and be and inspire our children as responsible adults and showcase good moral values, can that be a sensible step to transform our communities and the behaviors around us? There is nothing to prove to anyone just to be... Just to live a healthy life for ourselves. Just a lifestyle that's not only good for me or you but for everyone... Do you think that it can be done? Do you want to do it? Share your feedback. I am here listening.

Simon Nielsen 9/6/22 Simon Nielsen 9/6/22

Women In The City

“And for me to have a comfortable journey across my city I need safe zones and management in public transport services, and I need space to walk alone or with my kids, especially the one who is in the pram.” Peacemakers Pakistani challenge us to look at our cities and ask if they’re comfortable for all citizens. Do we really succeed in creating safe and inclusive places for everybody?

By Peacemakers Pakistani

“The vision ‘women in the city’ is beautiful. It depicts culture, harmony, open mindedness and freedom; when they are fearless and happy”, says Umaima Naeem.

Previously when I used to think about this topic, I used to research and find ways for making cities safer for women, but now for the first time, I want to experience the city from the perspective of providing comfort to the women. This means that I explore and re-imagine the city for myself as a woman for the sake of being comfortable in my city, rather than being safe.

Because this term ‘safety’ is no longer serving me to feel related to my city, rather it arises a feeling of insecurity and escape in the back of my mind. It brings barriers, cameras (cameras are only useful after something had happened, anyway), controlled movement, and all those things that force me to stay alert and formal rather than being me. It tells me that I can’t explore my city unless I am sure that I am safe, which is not the only way to do it. There is a possibility that I feel comfortable than I can go out and explore as well and relate to my city, its spaces and its people, hopefully.

This also tells me that in order to feel comfortable I have certain rights to be fulfilled, and I must know that what they are. Women are different from men and yes the gender thing counts and we must embrace that rather than denying that. We need more than what men need from their places and so let’s reclaim the places for us! Let’s learn today about what we as a girl/women rightfully need as I explore the city from the lens and need of a woman.

As I step out of my home, I prefer travelling through public transport or walk on foot more than men. Men use cars more. And that means I contribute to the sustainable travelling, more points on my side. But the problem is that the city is being designed for cars rather than what I prefer to use. And for that reason in order to travel comfortably I have to resort to private cars and uber services which clearly shifts the sustainable mode of travelling by me, not my choice though!

And for me to have a comfortable journey across my city I need safe zones and management in public transport services and I need space to walk alone or with my kids especially the one who is in the pram. I need space, I need footpath. I also need trees for shelter. And also, I need benches and a nice place to sit and relax and to wait. A sitting element that is comfortable as it is placed near trees, lights and shade and is visible during day and night time. It is not something that I need only, it is a basic necessity for active mobility, for people who are sick, disable, caretakers, child caretakers etc. We all need a comfortable place to sit as we travel across the city at whatever time.

Also, as a woman, I tend to use toilets more often than men for sake of myself or my children. Also if we analyze, women bathroom (toilet seat/wc) should be at least three times the size of men bathroom. Also, there should be a safe space for my children to wait for me especially the ones in the pram, if I ever travel alone with my kids. As an architect I can imagine the spatial requirements of a facility. And I must ask for more space and facility than men if I want more girls/women to use city spaces.

Also when it comes to designing spaces we tend to segregate spaces for boys and girls in a manner that is restricted to certain play or activity. It is mostly visible in playgrounds. The accessibility and movement of girls shouldn’t be hindered and restricted rather than facilitated in a fair manner. There must be the opportunity to have different types of play and activities in one place at same time.

And yes, comfort isn’t just a matter of providing amenities but also a psychological comfort is required to step into a place. That can happen if a girl/woman is sure that if any mishap happen, she can report to management and an action will be taken. Say no to sleaze! Campaign awareness and protection units must be placed and organized in public spaces. It’s time to provide girls/women the rights they have and make this city a place of pride for all.

All of this is possible if we start partnerships with architects, urban planners, transit authorities, landscape architects and planning agencies and educate the design professions about ways to build projects from the outset that consider women’s safety and comfort as a key element of their design program; this could set the stage for and induce the psycho-social, behavioral, and cultural changes that need to take place before women are truly able to enjoy public spaces and engage fully in the civic life of their cities. And it is being done by Global Placemaking Network in different countries.

These rights and demands of women in the city are from the findings in Barcelona, Spain as they lead their project called ‘Superblocks’ meant to reclaim the streets for pedestrians as cars occupy more space than any other road user, cyclists or just hangouts. Do check out how they are practicing and creating spaces that are built for women and other vulnerable citizens as well.

Simon Nielsen 8/14/22 Simon Nielsen 8/14/22

How Girls Disappear From The Public Space

“I believe that when girls/women start disappearing or hiding in the city, children disappear as well. And that’s how a downfall to community life or city vibrancy begins.” Peacemakers Pakistani share a crucial story of the use of public space.

By Peacemakers Pakistani

(These are brief findings from some personal experience and the stories girls told me in Pakistan)

In one of our articles previously, we have shared what public space means to us… public space can be interpreted as the public living room of a city, of which our houses are the bedrooms. A place where everyone, regardless of his or her background and ideology, can communicate with each other, share laughter and enter in to debate about anything. It is also a place in which people can sit and look at other people, while they can also be left unhindered if they want to be alone amongst strangers. Despite the public character, the place must ensure intimacy and give people the feeling of safety and comfort. In addition, a good public space must be able to emphasise a transition and interplay from the private domain to the public domain, whereby one for instance - while sitting at home - can look at a square from the window of his house and can let his thoughts wander for a moment.

It means that terraces, balconies and windows are a mode of transition from private to public domain and can play a vital role in forming the frame of urban space. But, do we see girls/women using it freely, like boys/men do? The answer is NO! Let me share a story here: Once there was a girl standing in the window of a home in the old settlement of Lahore. The window opened right into the street; it was her favourite spot to enjoy the hustle bustle of street life. She was just a little girl playing mindlessly with her bangles as she looked outside of her window. Right then, she noticed, a man on a cycle crossing the street again and again, and on paying attention she knew that he was looking at her, noticing her; he was a man old enough to be her father’s elder. She got scared and hid herself in disgust. Not only she closed the windows, she threw her bangles away as well.

This incident not only moved the girl from the urban frame but also hindered her movement and perception about the city spaces outside home and its people. Also, it encouraged the street being taken by boys as there was no reason left to scold boys for standing near a house where there is a possibility that a girl might appear in the window, because she won’t. This is not only a story happening in the old streets but in new societies as well. Because it’s the behaviours that are causing problem not the urban frame, it’s how people are using their spaces that matters not the way the spaces are connected to each other, because spaces and their connection differs from place to place, it’s human nature that stays the same. The only possibility for change is present if people change their way of perceiving things in their mind and how they react to it and also if people start giving value to other beings and their rights. That’s only how the change is possible.

Streets also come under the category of public spaces. When a girl steps out of her house, her eyes are wide open not out of wonder, anymore, but out of alertness about her surroundings due to the incidents of harassment, robbery, fast pace cars, insufficient space for movement etc. She feels like she has to be hyper alert to protect her. She feels unsafe when she is out alone, whatever the time might be.

Another story I would like to share here, about a girl, who had recently learned how to ride a bicycle. She went out one afternoon on her bicycle to explore her neighbourhood, after school hours, she was happy and then suddenly she realised she was being chased by boys on a bike. She somehow managed to escape them but they had seen her entering her home unfortunately. That night, her bicycle was stolen from her porch. And since then, the girl didn’t step out of her house alone, and also stopped enjoying the walk in her porch. The limitations incidents like these put on the child aren’t just about outside home but within home boundaries as well, these limitations take place within minds. Girls are more vulnerable to such incidents as they perceive and react in a sensitive manner, they either hide themselves or they go out violently, protesting or doing whatever they wish. Both of these reactions aren’t healthy for girls themselves or the children that might be under their care.

Women/ girls potentially use public transport more than men. But now they are adapting to personal cars or uber drivers which eventually add more cars to streets and fail the concept of sustainable public transport. The reason is clear…. Harassment and evil incidents happen in public transport and areas everyday and every moment, unfortunately. The reaction is an outcome of actions that are being overlooked by officials and city policy makers and management.

Let’s talk about parks, a place needed for leisure, picnics and for healthy connection with nature. Parks have trees for shade and comfort but, it also screens the inner park from outer roads or neighbourhood. Playgrounds are different, they are dominated with spaces for boys and their sports, which lead to girls feeling, left out, which is another story. But about parks, the threat is different, if there are not enough girls or women using the place at the same time, there is always this fear that something might go wrong at any moment. So, the interaction with nature that was meant to restore energy through restful activity is reversed as the energy spent on mental stress activity and alertness to keep oneself safe from the surroundings.

I conclude here that, all of these small factors lead to girls/women disappearing from the city fabric and also not owning spaces with freedom and joy. And I believe that when girls/women start disappearing or hiding in the city, children disappear as well. And that’s how a downfall to community life or cities vibrancy begins. Therefore, we must try to consider things to change, rather than subside and act passive to the happenings in the city. Because, the evil might come back grown stronger, or let’s just say it already did; look around what’s happening already. Don’t you agree with me?

Simon Nielsen 6/22/22 Simon Nielsen 6/22/22

Practical Steps To Overcome Opposition To New Residents

“When you do hear complaints, it’s ok to gently point out that your town is open to everyone. People of all ages, all ethnicities, all backgrounds, all incomes. People who are new in town and people who have been here for generations. Our town is changing all the time because it is a living community of people.” Becky McCray and SaveYour.Town are open to newcomers.

By Becky McCray and SaveYour.Town

Welcoming new residents means dealing with those members of your community who are not so open to new people moving in.

Practical step 1: Magnify stories of people being welcoming

Because it’s uncomfortable when you hear complaints about new residents moving in, you remember it.

You don’t remember the thousand and one ways local people are being welcoming, because you never see most of them.

The woman who makes cookies for her new neighbor’s kids.

The man who stops to help someone carry their heavy moving boxes.

The people who go out of their way to invite a newcomer to an event, then stop by to pick them up.

When you do hear those stories, magnify them. Make sure everyone knows it’s normal and expected to welcome new people.

Practical step 2: Hold well-publicized welcome events

Another way to make sure everyone knows it’s normal and expected to welcome new people, is to hold welcome events for newcomers and publicize them.

Bennettsville, South Carolina, hosted regular gatherings of newcomers to learn more about them, and for the new residents to learn more about Bennettsville.

Officials answered questions like what to do with bulky garbage, how the electric bill works and how to submit articles to the local paper.

New residents shared their stories. They found places where they could volunteer and heard ideas about helping the downtown.

The secret to gathering the newcomers was to have the real estate agents who sold houses to them personally invite them. They could also ask the city to invite people who made new utility deposits, or check with the library so they can invite people who recently applied for a library card. Brainstorm more ways to find your own new residents.

When you hear complaints

When you do hear complaints, it’s ok to gently point out that your town is open to everyone. People of all ages, all ethnicities, all backgrounds, all incomes. People who are new in town and people who have been here for generations.

Our town is changing all the time because it is a living community of people.

And new people in your town are part of the change. They bring with them new ways of doing things, and new ideas.

We are valuing the people who are here now. Together, we’re creating the town we want to live in, one small step at a time.

Simon Nielsen 6/15/22 Simon Nielsen 6/15/22

Celebrating the 30th Anniversary of Ostrom’s Governing the Commons: Traditions and Trends in the Study of the Commons, Revisited

“In an era where planetary boundaries are coming into sight or have been surpassed, we are glad to see that our field has embraced global and national issues, besides its tradition of applying local and community perspectives. Where we once started off by contrasting the market and the state on the one hand, with self-governance alternatives, on the other, we now see a tendency to look beyond this dichotomy and study co-management, co-production the role of markets and participation, instead.” The editors-in-chief of International Journal of the Commons examine how the study of the commons is gaining speed.

By Frank van Laerhoven, Michael Schoon, Sergio Villamayor-Thomas & International Journal of the Commons

Introduction

The very first contribution to the International Journal of the Commons (IJC) provided a bibliometric analysis of traditions and trends in the study of the commons (van Laerhoven & Ostrom, 2007). In this paper, we revisit and expand that endeavor and ask ourselves: Where do we stand as a scholarly community, thirteen years later, in the year that we are celebrating the 30th anniversary of Ostrom’s Governing the Commons (1990)?

The above question is relevant for several reasons. In 2009, two years after the first bibliometric analysis, Elinor Ostrom was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics for her institutional analyses on community-based natural resource management. This event put the study of commons on the spot and has seemingly driven a new wave of both enthusiasts and critics of the institutional approach likely affecting its boundaries.

The start of commons scholarship can be understood as growing out of a rejection of Hardin’s prediction of natural resource degradation unless managed by governments or through private property rights (Poteete et al. 2010). Over time, however the approach appears to have been evolving. That was clear from the 2007 assessment. How have we fared since then?

At the time of van Laerhoven & Ostrom’s (2007) review, applications to forests, fisheries, irrigation systems, rangeland and water resources (i.e. the Big Five) clearly dominated the field, but at the same time an interest in framing novel topics, such as biodiversity, climate change or knowledge in terms of commons appeared to be emerging, as well. Has what we all study changed and evolved since then?

Although institutional analysis was the approach of choice in a majority of the studies back in 2007, it appeared that the dominance of economics, legal and political science studies was increasingly – albeit modestly – being challenged by a growing number of interdisciplinary, environmental studies. Has this trend substantiated since 2007?

An important observation derived from the 2007 review was the scattered nature of journals that contained publications on the commons. While positive, such dispersion potentially hindered knowledge accumulation and learning. One of the stated objectives of the International Journal of the Commons was to facilitate such accumulation and learning. Compared to the 2007 review, we can now assess whether IJC has managed to consolidate its niche over the last 13 years of its existence.

Advances and changes in depositories and search facilities allowed us to expand our key word search and be more specific regarding the sources than in the 2007 study. That study used Google Scholar. For our analysis, we used Scopus, to identify relevant documents published between the appearance of Hardin’s The tragedy of the commons in 1968, and the 30th anniversary of Ostrom’s Governing the Commons in 2020. Scopus is much more rigorous regarding allowing peer reviewed academic publications into its data base than Google Scholar. We hold that although the number of hits in Scopus is lower, the relevance of the articles will be significantly higher due to the fact that only peer-reviewed papers are included. We set the search terms to: {common pool resource} OR {common pool resources} OR {the commons}. These terms were applied to the title, abstract and/or key words associated with the article. The range was set from 1968 to 2020. From the source (i.e. journal) titles we excluded Parliamentary history; Parliamentary affairs; Parliaments estates and representation. We then proceeded to manually remove all titles for which no author name was available. We also manually removed all titles related with the House of Commons (by using ctrl+f, ‘parliament’ AND ‘house of’). These proceedings resulted in a list of 3,819 titles, that were downloaded as a spreadsheet. For all titles we collected information on subject area, author, title, year, journal, times cited, author affiliation data, and the abstract.

Publish or perish?

How vibrant is the scholarly branch of the commons community? How does the current stock-taking effort compare to the 2007 measurement of publication trends? Firstly, there are many of us! Our data base contains roughly 6,500 unique names. We observe that all of us manage to get word on the commons out in great numbers. Additionally, 74% of all publications on the commons that appeared between 1968–2019 were published after the 2007 study. Figure 1 gives an overview of the number of commons publication per year between 1968–2019.

*Fig. 1: Number of publication per year (1968–2019).*

During the last 50 years commons scholars have published their work in 1,900+ (!) different journals, although only 40 published 10 or more articles on the commons (see Figure 2). Since our first issue in 2007, IJC has become the most popular platform for commons studies. The objective of the founders of the journal to create a focal journal on the commons has been clearly achieved.

*Fig. 2: Number of publications per journal (only journals with 10 or more publications) – 1968–2007 and 2008–2019 compared.*

The position of the International Journal of the Commons in terms of publications is even more obvious from Figure 3. In the last 5 years (i.e. between 2015–2019), 14 journals published 10 or more articles on the commons. We hope that our initial wish to remedy the fragmentation of commons scholarship hasn’t led to undermining the diversity that is essential to the progress in our debates.

*Fig. 3: Number of publications per journal since 2015.*

The take-away point for us editors is that we need to make sure that our journal is widely and undeniably considered as a safe place for all stances, and all views on, and approaches to the commons.

Does anyone take notice? We answer this question by looking at the number of citations for the articles in our data base, to date. We find that the average number of citations amounts to 21. The median lays at 3. Figure 4 gives an overview of the distribution of citations over the publications in our data base. We can safely conclude that what we write has had and continues to have relevance.

*Fig. 4: Number of citations (1968–2019).*

The distribution of the observations is heavily skewed to the lower numbers (i.e., 0 to 20). There are 1,114 publications in our data set (i.e. about a third of all publications analyzed) that had no citations at all. The number of citations accumulated in the spectrum ranging from 1 to 20 citations is 2,116. On the other hand, there is also a number of publications with more than 100 citations (106 in total). Of the articles in IJC, 15 were cited over 20 times, above the average of the other journals represented in spite of being a new entrant to academic publishing. Since IJC’s inclusion in Scopus in 2011, it’s articles have been cited 8.4 times on average. For all other articles in our data base published since 2011 this average lays at 6.

Figure 5 lists the most prolific authors – they all have 10 or more publications that appear in our data base. All authors are white, all but one are male, and all but one are or were affiliated with Universities in the USA or Europe. (All but two have a beard.) Through our editorial policies, we have attempted to mitigate such challenges of diversity through our explicit support of authors in developing contexts. It does not resolve them, but we can address them as a community of scholars. And we would like to congratulate these wonderful contributors to the field.

Table 1 lists all publications in our data set that collected 500 or more citations.

Elinor Ostrom is listed with no less than 5 titles. We suspect that among the 12,514 citations accumulated by Hardin – the #1 in this list – there will be a significant number that cites the source for disagreeing with it. Figure 6 shows the trends in citations for Hardin’s Tragedy of the commons and Ostrom’s Governing the commons, respectively. Both titles appear to be at the very core of the scholarly debate, still.

*Fig. 6: Hardin and Ostrom – number of citations per year (1968–2019).*

A field dominated by a comparatively low number of highly cited publications might prevent the emergence of new ideas and/or facilitate the ideologization of research. What we editors learn here is that these observations point to the continued need to improve the circulation of ideas and findings among the commons community. This would not only increase the visibility of new methods and make theoretical progress, but also avoid redundancy in our research endeavors (i.e. questions that have been already addressed).

What are our disciplines?

Based on the disciplinary affinity of the journals that attracted most of the commons studies between 1985–2005, the 2007 study revealed that at the time the study of the commons appeared mostly a social sciences affair. With better search facilities, and with the search period expanded to 1968–2019, what do we find in our analysis? Figure 7 depicts a trend that is based on the university departments that are mentioned under the affiliation data of authors and co-authors. Figure 8 is based on the subject areas that an article belongs to, as recorded by Scopus. Both figures confirm but also detail what the 2007 study established by cruder means. While our object of study is often a natural resource system, surprisingly few colleagues from the natural sciences frame their topic of study as a commons.

*Number of publications per discipline – 1968–2007 and 2008–2019 compared.*

*Number of publications per subject area – 1968–2007 and 2008–2019 compared.*

An editorial policy resulting from this observation is to pay more attention to submissions coming from authors with an explicit natural science background or to accommodate special issues that bundle natural science contributions that frame their object of study in commons terms.

Working together?

The 2007 study stated that “…researchers who studied specific commons before the mid-1980s were [..] less likely than their contemporary colleagues to be well informed about the work of scholars in other disciplines, about other sectors in their own region of interest, or in other regions of the world.” (van Laerhoven & Ostrom, 2007, p.3). With means that are a little bit more sophisticated than what the authors in 2007 had at their disposal, we assessed the validity of this statement. Are we any good – and did we become better – at collaboration, in the sense that we reach out to other disciplines, other sectors and other geographic regions?

Figure 9 shows the number of commons publications per year that are produced by authors from different types of departments. Figure 10 zooms in on trends in collaboration between authors from the social and the natural sciences, respectively. Figure 11 depicts the number publications per year that are the result of collaborations between authors working for universities in different countries.

*Fig. 9: Number of publications per year resulting from collaboration between different types of university departments (1968–2019).*

*Fig. 10: Number of publications per year resulting from collaboration between the natural and the social sciences (1968–2019).*

*Fig. 11: Number of publications per year resulting from collaboration between universities in different countries (1968–2019).*

Despite the increasing trends, we think the absolute numbers are rather embarrassing for a community that pays so much lip service to and prominently studies collaboration and collective action. We believe collaboration cannot only facilitate the circulation of new ideas and make theory progress, but also facilitate comparative work. As editors we will seek to encourage collaboration by paying special attention to it in submissions and through proactively looking for special issue ideas that stand out in terms of collaboration between disciplines and/or regions.

Where do we work?

The affiliation information for all unique authors in our data set allows us to assess where their workplaces are located. Almost 71% of all commons scholars work at universities in Europe or the USA. Figure 12 presents a list of countries where 50 or more publications in our data were produced. It compares the periods before and after the appearance of the 2007 assessment by Van Laerhoven and Ostrom.

*Fig. 12: Number of publications per country – 1968–2007 and 2008–2019 compared.*

We find that between 1968 and 1998 our domain was dominated by scholars affiliated with a university in the USA – they produced approximately 75% of all commons publications in any given year during that era. Since the new millennium this dominance is somewhat shrinking in favor of authors based in Europe. These produced approximately 40% of all commons publications between 2008–2018. The dominance of USA and Europe based scholars has remained intact for the entire 50 years that our analysis spans.

Although this observation is mostly symptomatic for processes that we cannot control, it is an editorial policy of IJC to give explicit support – both editorial and financial support (in the form of allowing extra rounds of review and author fee exemptions) – to authors from universities that are not based in Europe or the USA.

Where do we do our research?

There is a remarkable discrepancy between the places where we work and the places where we do our research (see Figure 13).

*Fig. 13: Discrepancy between the places where we work and where we do our research.*

Figure 14 provides a ranking of the number of times a certain country is mentioned in the abstracts of the titles in our data base – the list is limited to the countries that appear 10 times or more. India is the clear favorite.

*Fig. 14: Number of times a country is mentioned in the abstracts of the titles in our data base – 1968–2007 and 2008–2019 compared.*

An editorial policy that we have implemented and will continue to develop is allowing room for contributions on commons in countries that are not among the usual suspects, e.g. Central Asia (Special Feature in Volume 14), Myanmar (Kimengsi et al. 2019) or Kirgizstan (Kasymov & Thiel, 2019).

What do we study?

Arguably, commons studies grew out of concerns associated with the tragedy of the commons. Accordingly, typical studies of the commons have been associated with local contexts, particularly with common pool resources such as forests, fisheries and irrigation, and an interest in the opportunities and challenges of common property rights and rules. In this section we present a crude assessment of developments regarding the empirical and theoretical boundaries of our field.

The Big Five?

Hardin (1968) asked us to “picture a pasture, open to all.” Pastures, together with fisheries, forests, irrigation systems, and water management belong to what the authors of the 2007 study referred to as the “Big Five” in the study of the commons. Through 2007 these topics drew most of the combined attention of commons scholars. Overall, we find that this trend continues unabetted (see Figure 15). Over time, we see a relative increase in interest in water and fisheries since 2007.1

As editors, we have been encouraged with initiatives to push commons research in new directions, as scholars increasingly look at the digital commons (Special Feature in issue 7(2)), biodiversity conservation, genetics and microbial commons (Special Feature in issue 4(1)), technology (Special Feature in issue 5(1)), and other fields. We see great opportunities for the cross-pollination of other fields as commons scholars take commons theory to new arenas and bring insights new to the commons from these fruitful forays, which we discuss more in a section on ‘new’ commons. We will continue to support this expanded view of the field moving forward.

Institutions for collective action?

Institutions for collective action have always been at the center of our attention. Not for nothing, Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action was the full title of Elinor Ostrom’s seminal 1990 book (Ostrom, 1990). Figure 16 shows how trends have evolved.2 Directly after the launch of our domain by Hardin, institutions weren’t so much on our minds, but that changed quickly. A dominant interest in institutions continues and even increases after 2007.

Too local?

One of the common critiques of commons research is that its researchers and practitioners usually study at the community or local scale. While Figure 17 shows that this critique may be overstated, as editors we anecdotally feel that there is a surfeit of studies at small-scales and a dearth of broader-scaled studies. With some exceptions (e.g. Ostrom 2010), much of the work that we see is small-scale analyses of case studies.

There have been successful efforts for exchange between commons scholars and large-scale studies. As editors, we support efforts to address this shortcoming, as illustrated by IJC’s special feature on The Social-Ecological Systems Meta-Analysis Database (SESMAD) (Cox, 2014).

Between the market and the state?

Where Hardin claimed that only the state or the market could prevent a tragedy of the commons, Ostrom dedicated most of her career to showing how there is a lot of room on the spectrum that ranges between these two extremes (e.g. Ostrom, 1994). Figure 18 presents a crude way to gauge our field’s attention to the market, the state, and self-governance over time.

As the graph suggest, commons scholarship has increasingly included the role of governments and markets in its discourse. We do not know, however, how these terms are used. Much of the commons scholarship grew out of a rejection of governments and market as the only solutions to natural resource management. There are signs that such an “adversarial” approach has reversed over time. Paradigmatic examples are the emergence of new co-management literature (Berkes 1994, Frey et al. 2016) or recent calls to dig deeper into the specifics of hybrid modes of governance (Lemos and Agrawal 2006, Driessen et al. 2012, Villamayor-Tomas et al. 2019). A question for further research is whether the trend unveiled here corresponds with a qualitative change in the way the trichotomy communities-government-markets is addressed.

The design principles?

Ostrom identified the following eight design principles of stable local common pool resource management (Ostrom, 1990; Ostrom 2005; Cox et al. 2010):

Boundaries: Clearly defined boundaries (i.e. of the resource and of the group of users);
Rules: Congruence between appropriation and provision rules and local conditions;
Participation: Most individuals affected by the operational rules can participate in modifying the operational rules;
Monitoring: Effective monitoring by monitors who are part of or accountable to the resource users;
Sanctioning: Graduated sanctions: Appropriators who violate operational rules are likely to be assessed graduated sanctions;
Conflict resolution: Resource users and their officials have rapid access to low-cost local arenas to resolve conflicts among users or between users and officials.;
Autonomy: The rights of appropriators to devise their own institutions are not challenged by external governmental authorities;
Nested enterprises: Appropriation, provision, monitoring, enforcement, conflict resolution, and governance activities are organized in multiple layers of nested enterprises.

Figure 19 illustrates to what extent and in broad strokes our research seems to have a continued interest in these principles.3 The earlier mentioned solid interest in institutions is reflected in the interest in rules that is captured in this graph. The earlier mentioned shift towards co-management and governance seems to be reflected in the interest in participation, here. Something that this graph does not reflect is recent interest among scholars to move into a configurational approach to the study of the principles. While evidence clearly supports the empirical validity of the principles (Cox et al. 2010), this evidence is less clear about which sets of them are more relevant depending on the context, or the pathways through which the principles are more easily implemented and make a difference. Recent works have started to move into that direction (Baggio et al. 2016, Schlager 2016, Villamayor-Tomas and Garcia-Lopez 2019). We believe this is a promising approach to making progress.

*Fig. 19: Attention for the design principles.*

Only case studies?

Case studies appear to be in our genes. After all, Governing the Commons (Ostrom, 1990) was based on the analysis of a collection of case studies, aggregated in a meta-analysis. Historically, much of the work on the commons was comprised of case studies at the local scale. But is the impression that we may be spending too much time on producing yet another case study correct? Both before and after 2007 about 15% of all abstracts in our data base mention the word case (Figure 20). Both before and after 2007 only a minor part of all abstracts mentioning the word case also mention the word framework, theory and/or model (11% and 13%, respectively), suggesting that there is still room for improvement regarding the ability to extrapolate case findings in order to formulate generic claims.

We still value the importance of case studies. We have seen (as readers) and experienced (as authors) that the value of case studies is often unappreciated and underestimated by many journals (with clear exceptions such as Case Studies in the Environment). This observation strengthens us in our editorial ambition to continue to work with authors to publish case studies, particularly from underrepresented geographies. One vision that we would like to see come to fruition in the coming years is to provide some consistency in format and common meta-data required for all cases with a goal to allow for more effective cross-case comparison. We will start this within IJC, but we would like to see it shared by a suite of journals.

New commons?

The 2007 article hinted at a glimmering trend indicating a growing interest in digital commons (issue 7(2)), intellectual property rights (forthcoming issue), biodiversity (issue 8(2)) and climate change (issue 13(2)). There appears to be a growing interest in commoning, and urban issues, as well. Figure 21 illustrates how an interest in some of the new(er) commons has been developing between 2016–2019, and how this interest compares to attention for the more traditional topics during that same period.

*Fig. 21: Attention for some new(er) commons compared with attention for the “big five” between 2016–2019.*

As editors, we are encouraged by the appropriate usage of the commons and commoning in many new areas, and we will continue to support this. In particular, we would encourage special features in these areas. In part, we believe that pushing into new realms is not only appropriate, but it also increases our audience and brings new voices and perspectives into our community.

Traditions & trends?

In sum, this admittedly coarse and rather unsophisticated bibliographic analysis appears to reveal the following. We publish more and more (but so do all other fields and domains). During the last 50 years, we have found 1,900+ peer-reviewed journals willing to publish our work. Since 2007, the International Journal of the Commons appears to have become our favorite outlet. There’s an incredible number of scholars that publish or have published on the commons during the last 50 years – approximately 6,500. Publications get noticed and cited (21 times on average), an indication we think, of the fact that the debate on the commons is still ongoing and vibrant. Many disciplines are involved – we count 28 subject areas – but the social sciences, more particularly economics, dominate. There is remarkably little evidence of multi/inter-disciplinarity or across-country collaboration. We are mostly affiliated with universities in the USA and Europe, but we mostly do research, elsewhere (i.e. mostly in what some refer to as the global south). We seem to be consistently interested in ‘big five’ topics (i.e. forests, fisheries, irrigation, water and rangeland), and in an institutional take on the commons. We have always liked and continue to favor case studies, but there appears to be a growing concern about the lack of standardization for the sake of comparison, and subsequently, theory development. In an era where planetary boundaries are coming into sight or have been surpassed (Steffen et al. 2015), we are glad to see that our field has embraced global and national issues, besides its tradition of applying local and community perspectives. Where we once started off by contrasting the market and the state on the one hand, with self-governance alternatives, on the other, we now see a tendency to look beyond this dichotomy and study co-management, co-production the role of markets and participation, instead.

Consequences for our editorial policy?

The Focus and Scope section of the IJC portal calls attention to our interest in interdisciplinary work and the role of “institutions for use and management of resources that are (or could be) enjoyed collectively” such as natural resources or knowledge. Based on our observations here presented we derive the following as input for IJC’s editorial policies:

We will make sure that our journal is widely and undeniably considered as a safe place for all views on, and approaches to the commons;
We will attempt to mitigate challenges of diversity through our explicit support of authors in developing contexts;
We will attempt to improve the circulation of ideas and findings among the commons community, among other things by giving more attention to new methods, looking for theoretical progress, and avoiding redundancy in research endeavors;
We will encourage the submission of work coming from authors with an explicit natural science background;
We will seek to encourage collaboration in all sorts and forms, i.e. between disciplines, departments, and geographic regions;
We will allow room for contributions on commons in countries that so far have gotten less attention;
We will encourage and support initiatives that push commons research in new directions and that can complement our conventional interest in the governance of relatively small-scale, local natural resources;
We will support efforts to encourage the standardization of case study work in an attempt to facilitate cross case comparisons for the sake of theory development.
Although not the object of this first study, we recognize the importance of bridging the gap between practitioner, policy-making and scholarly communities. This has been an ongoing challenge for both IJC and the International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC). We will keep supporting submissions and initiatives that move in that direction.

The tools at our disposal to accomplish these goals include

Proactively identifying and financing individual work and special issues that would help us achieving these objectives;
Offering editorial support (in the form extra rounds of reviews), and financial support (in the form of author fee exemptions) to authors from developing contexts;
Create an editorial board with the means, capacity and willingness to support these goals, and;
Encourage contributions that help moving us towards the accomplishment of these goals by means of the Ostrom Memorial Award for Most Innovative Paper.

Future analysis?

In this analysis, we zoomed out and took a closer look at the large number of publications that appeared over the span of 50 years. A shortcoming of this approach regards the fact that we cannot really appreciate and interpret the more turbulent developments that are taking place at the forefront of our field, right now, or outside peer-reviewed scholarly work.

As editors we have the privilege of being able to follow in real time what is going on at the very forefront of our community. After finalizing this analysis, we all three had the feeling that the sense we are getting from our familiarity with exciting, more recent approaches to the commons is not very well reflected in our data set. In an analysis of almost 4,000 titles, recent attention to for example gender (37 titles), inequality (60 titles) or environmental justice (80 titles) disappear under the volume of other writing, and subsequently remains below the notice of many. The same holds for the seemingly dominant grip that institutionalism keeps on our field. The numbers from this analysis don’t let us tell the more nuanced story of pioneering work that is being developed as we speak.

Therefore, in our next editorial we hope to counter the picture that emerges from the current analysis with an analysis that captures more accurately the turbulence and cutting-edge novel work of commons scholarship by today’s pioneers.

Notes

1. We used the COUNTIF function in Excel. For gauging the state of interest in fisheries, we searched all abstract for “fish,” for forestry, we used the search terms when applying this function to the abstracts in our data base: “timber” and “forest,” for irrigation we used “irrigate,” for water we used “lake,” “river,” and “groundwater,” and for rangeland we searched for the occurrence in the abstracts of the terms “cattle,” “grass,” rangeland,” “pasture,” “meadow,” and “pastor.”

2. We used the COUNTIF function in Excel. For gauging the apparent interest in these topics we used the following terms when applying this function to the abstracts of the titles in our data base: coordinat; collaborat; collective action; organi; cooperat; institution.

3. We used the COUNTIF function in Excel. For gauging the apparent interest in each one of the eight design principles, we used the following terms when applying this function to the abstracts of the titles in our data base: “boundar”; “rule”; participat”; “monitor”; “sanction”; “conflict”; “autonomy”; and “nested.”

Acknowledgements

We thank the approximately 6,500 colleagues who during the last 50 years have published on the commons.

Competing Interests

This editorial is authored by the EICs of the International Journal of the Commons.

References

Baggio, J., Barnett, A., Perez-Ibarra, I., Brady, U., Ratajczyk, E., Rollins, N., … & Anderies, J. (2016). Explaining success and failure in the commons: the configural nature of Ostrom’s institutional design principles. International Journal of the Commons, 10(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.634
Berkes, F. 1994. Co-management: Bridging the two solitudes. Northern Perspectives, 22(2–3): 18–20.
Cox, M. (2014). Understanding large social-ecological systems: introducing the SESMAD project. International Journal of the Commons, 8(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.406
Cox, M., Arnold, G., & Villamayor-Tomas, S. (2010). A review of design principles for community-based natural resource management. Ecology and Society, 15(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03704-150438
Driessen, P. P. J., Dieperink, C., Van Laerhoven, F., Runhaar, H. A. C., & Vermeulen, W. J. V. (2012). Towards a Conceptual Framework for The Study of Shifts in Modes of Environmental Governance – Experiences From The Netherlands. Environmental Policy and Governance, 22(3), 143–160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1580
Frey, U. J., Villamayor-Tomas, S., & Theesfeld, I. (2016). A continuum of governance regimes: A new perspective on co-management in irrigation systems. Environmental Science & Policy, 66, 73–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.08.008
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243
Kasymov, U., & Thiel, A. (2019). Understanding the Role of Power in Changes to Pastoral Institutions in Kyrgyzstan. International Journal of the Commons, 13(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.870
Kimengsi, J. N., Aung, P. S., Pretzsch, J., Haller, T., & Auch, E. (2019). Constitutionality and the Co-Management of Protected Areas: Reflections from Cameroon and Myanmar. International Journal of the Commons, 13(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.934
Lemos, M. C., & Agrawal, A. (2006). Environmental governance. Annual Revies of Environmental Resources, 31, 297–325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.31.042605.135621
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge university press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763
Ostrom, E. (1994). Neither market nor state: Governance of common-pool resources in the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton university press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7s7wm
Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global environmental change, 20(4), 550–557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004
Poteete, A. R., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Working together: collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400835157
Schlager, E. (2016). Introducing the” The Importance of Context, Scale, and Interdependencies in Understanding and Applying Ostrom’s Design Principles for Successful Governance of the Commons”. International Journal of the Commons, 10(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.767
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., … & Folke, C. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223), 1259855. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855
Van Laerhoven, F., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Traditions and Trends in the Study of the Commons. International Journal of the Commons, 1(1), 3–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.76
Villamayor-Tomas, S., & Garcia-Lopez, G. (2018). Social movements as key actors in governing the commons: Evidence from community-based resource management cases across the world. Global environmental change, 53, 114–126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.09.005
Villamayor-Tomas, S., Thiel, A., Amblard, L., Zikos, D., & Blanco, E. (2019). Diagnosing the role of the state for local collective action: Types of action situations and policy instruments. Environmental science & policy, 97, 44–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.03.009

Simon Nielsen 6/1/22 Simon Nielsen 6/1/22

Pro-Tip: Start Using “-Ing Lists”

“In rich environments, people are interacting with the environment and transforming it with their own actions – moving a chair into the sun, doing a chalk painting, posting a flier, bringing their own chessboard, etc. Our built environments are a result of this constant interaction between the social context and spatial conditions.” Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, shares a tip on how to create meaningful places.

“In rich environments, people are interacting with the environment and transforming it with their own actions – moving a chair into the sun, doing a chalk painting, posting a flier, bringing their own chessboard, etc. Our built environments are a result of this constant interaction between the social context and spatial conditions.” Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, shares a tip on how to create meaningful places.

By Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader

There’s a UPS ad campaign right now that asks “Can you believe all the ings we can fit under one roof?” It goes on to explain all the things you can do at UPS, like pack-ing, mailbox-ing, fax-ing, copy-ing, and so on. I’ve worked on several design teams over the years where my particular niche is to develop the space program that informs the design of a place. One question I always ask is, How many “ings” can we fit into this design? And that gets me started on creating an -ing list.

An -ing list is my way to center planning and design around a program of activities. It’s a method that draws a team into a deeper investigation of how people will use a space – and it’s a great predictor of how active that space will be. It gets us away from focusing too much on form – at least long enough to really explore the project in terms of its function, or program.

Creating places for people

If you look at the most active people environments, you’ll find they usually have the widest selection of things you can do in the space. Is it really that surprising that the kitchen is the room where we by far spend the most time at home? Of all our rooms, our kitchens have the longest -ing list, including cook-ing, eat-ing meals, eat-ing snacks, drink-ing, mak-ing coffee, wash-ing dishes, sitt-ing, socializ-ing, unload-ing groceries, work-ing at the kitchen table, and more. What other room in the house offers such a rich menu of activities to such a broad spectrum of people?

Ecological psychologists use the term “behavior setting” – the idea that people recognize specific settings in their environment for their utility, and this is a basic way we navigate the world. When we see certain things grouped together in a space, we know what it’s good for. So, you see a stove and some cabinets and counters and a fridge – your brain registers that as a kitchen, and you categorize it internally along with all the other kitchens you’ve ever seen. You instantly know what you can do in the space. Now, if the cabinets and counters were in a room without the fridge and stove, then we might be confused by the room’s design, or we might classify it as a completely different behavior setting, perhaps a workshop.

The power of this idea is that it links physical spaces with behaviors, as well as meanings that people carry around with them – some of which are mostly universal (everyone agrees on what kitchens are good for), and some of which are personal/cultural meanings and memories.

Placemaking and design

In the early stages of an urban planning or design project I spend lots of time developing -ing lists to think about how to create experiences and active settings within the project site – whether it’s a public park, a main street, a campus, or a retail environment.

I like to identify key audiences (are you serving mostly young college students, neighborhood residents, office workers?), and then develop an -ing list for each. Lots of the -ing list ideas come from stakeholder meetings and workshops. The initial -ing lists should be long. Have you considered children and the elderly? Are people of different income levels accommodated? Are there opportunities for people to be alone as well as in groups?

You can then start to cluster items from your -ing lists into places, and bring the design back in to conceptualize truly engaging experiences (behavior settings). At this point I make sure to combine activities that will draw diverse audiences together.

Things get even more interesting when we begin to layer in more social content – communing, exchanging knowledge, educating, building environmental awareness. In other words, this exercise can put us in direct contact with higher goals and outcomes. Thus, for some clients it can be very rewarding to use this process early in their planning process.

In rich environments, people are interacting with the environment and transforming it with their own actions – moving a chair into the sun, doing a chalk painting, posting a flier, bringing their own chessboard, etc. Our built environments are a result of this constant interaction between the social context and spatial conditions.

Decades of culture in a place brings additional meaning, as layers and layers of built features and memories accrete. It’s one reason that walking down Main Street, or along a street in SoHo is so much more soulful than a new retail development – even one that’s well-done.

The -ing list for Main Street will be quite complex and although commercial developers may attempt to reproduce the experience in a private retail environment, such as a mall, they carry over only a fraction of the -ing list to this simulated environment. You could say the term “strip mall” pertains very much to the stripping away of behaviors, and therefore of richness.

Occasionally I will see an urban space that looks to me not at all special or rich, but then I find out that a group of men gathers there daily for hours to play dominoes and talk – the social content is rich even if the physical setting is not.

When we match the social and behavioral content to a physical setting we create places of meaning. And each individual will add their own cultural interpretations so that although people may share some of the same experiences in a place, there will also be vastly different experiences for each person based on their own stories, backgrounds, and beliefs.

Pretty amazing how far an -ing list can take you!

More on how I work with -ing lists in planning and design:

Goal-setting and Visioning

· Consider the goals of the client, the goals of the community, and the site. After many deep conversations you will arrive at a vision statement. This is not a simple task.

· Identify key audiences and develop some basic user personas – are you serving mostly young college students, neighborhood residents, office workers? All of the above?

· Ask underlying questions relating to functional aspects of achieving this vision and solving these problems: Collect and analyze data, including contextual information about local cultural values, history, and markets. Do additional site reconnaissance.

· Identify form-related goals of the client and community – the high-level characteristics that will lead how the site and its context are treated from a design standpoint.

· Revisit your vision, break it down into sub-goals or themes. Fit in site-specific and environmental characteristics.

Preliminary programming

· Create an -ing list under each theme. What are people doing under each theme? Be generous, refer to your meeting notes with the client and community. The -ing lists should be long.

· Evaluate your -ing list by audiences – have you considered children and the elderly? Are people of different income levels accommodated? Are there opportunities for people to be alone as well as in groups?

· Cluster your -ing lists into places that consist of engaging experiences. Be sure to combine activities that will draw diverse audiences together.

Program concept development

· Test these abstract place ideas with the real-world context. Make them more concrete by matching them to specific locations and environmental characteristics. What are the space requirements? What are the management requirements, and do they fall within the capability of the client? Are there opportunities to bring in other partners?

· Once you have mapped some places that you think have real possibility, think about adjacencies, linkages and flow between them and the surrounding context, including important natural features. Evaluate existing and potential circulation patterns, entrances, and drivers of traffic. Do several user journey maps for different types of audiences (user personas), and arrange your places in ways that increase enjoyment and explorability.

· Finalize your program in a program diagram and with narrative text describing the detailed experience of each space and subspace. Add details about comfort and amenities; consider the need for flexible spaces that can hold events. Add any design criteria that are important to its function (e.g. shade, water, seating types, etc.).

Design Development proceeds from here.

Simon Nielsen 5/30/22 Simon Nielsen 5/30/22

Building Inclusive Communities

“When we think of someone as being poor, homeless, disabled, non-English speaking, at-risk, addicted, mentally ill, unemployed or retired, we tend to focus on what that person is missing rather than on the contributions they could make. A truly inclusive neighborhood recognizes that everyone needs community and that community needs everyone.” Community activator, Jim Diers, examines the potential found in real inclusion.

By Jim Diers, community activator

I like to think of myself as a community builder, but I know that community isn’t necessarily a good. A community is simply a group of people who identify with and support one another. Most communities are one kind of people who share a particular interest or identity. Whether they are nazis, gangs, or gated, communities can exclude and even oppress people who are different than themselves.

Communities are at their best when they are inclusive, a quality that seems to be in short supply these days. There is so much stereotyping and polarization with people divided by politics, religion and culture. There is also an epidemic of loneliness as far too many people find themselves at the margins of community.

That is why I am particularly passionate about the potential of place-based communities. It is in our neighborhoods and small towns that people with a variety of identities reside. True, some places have become boringly homogeneous, but most places include people with differences whether those are defined by interest, age, politics, religion, income, race, culture, sexual orientation, abilities, employment, or housing status. Our towns and neighborhoods provide a context for a community with a common identity that can encompass many otherwise separate identities.

Just because diverse people may live in the same neighborhood, however, does not guarantee an inclusive community. Even in places that are quite diverse, I find that the community groups are less so. Neighborhood associations in Seattle, for example, tend to have a higher percentage of older, white homeowners than does the neighborhood as a whole. Local faith-based groups are typically segregated not only by religion but by race. Youth and seniors belong to different organizations. There is a myriad of interest-based groups, each with its own adherents.

While there are often good reasons for people to associate with others who are like themselves, such homogeneity will do little to address the challenges of social isolation, stereotyping and polarization. Moreover, a neighborhood will have negligible impact at City Hall if the activists can’t demonstrate that they represent the multiple interests and identities of their place. Here, then, are some of the lessons I’ve learned about how to build a more inclusive community.

Listen More

Most associations have a very narrow agenda and their community outreach generally involves promoting that agenda. Then, when people don’t join their campaign, they blame people for being apathetic. No one is apathetic. Everyone cares deeply about something. So, if associations really want to get more members, they should spend more time listening and less promoting.

Many neighborhood associations in the United States, for example, are focused on land use issues. Then, they complain about how difficult it is to engage tenants. If they listened to tenants, they would learn that tenants are often more concerned about issues such as housing affordability, access to transportation, public safety, and opportunities for their children.

In Canada, many of the neighborhood associations were initially organized to build and manage hockey and other facilities for community recreation. Some associations continue to have that focus but find it difficult to recruit new Canadians who may not share their passion for playing hockey or running a community center. The 157 Community Leagues in Edmonton are taking a different approach; they are co-sponsoring an Abundant Communities Initiative which is training volunteers to have conversations with their neighbors to learn what they care about.

Likewise, Sport New Zealand is concerned that fewer people are participating in organized sports and that significant portions of the population are underrepresented in its programs. So, sporting groups throughout the country are taking a community-led approach. In addition to promoting rugby, these groups are listening to community priorities and finding ways to support those initiatives.

Meet Less

Most associations rely on meetings as the primary vehicle for engaging their community. While some meetings are necessary, they are probably the least effective tool for engagement. Shy people don’t feel like their attendance makes any difference. Young people (and most others) feel bored. People seldom see results from their participation; one meeting just leads to another.

Projects are a great way to engage people. Everyone, including shy people, has something to contribute. Unlike with meetings, projects entail a short-term commitment and there’s always a result. When the Vancouver Foundation’s research revealed an alarming rate of social isolation, their solution wasn’t to fund discussion groups on the topic but rather to support more than 1000 community self-help projects in 17 communities across the lower mainland of British Columbia.

Social events can be an even more powerful way to build relationships, especially across differences. In Southeast Seattle, world dance parties attract hundreds of people from all ages and cultures as they teach one another their dance. Likewise, everyone relates to food. As Pam Wharton of Incredible Edibles in Todmorden, England puts it: “We’re a very inclusive movement. If you eat, you’re in.” Community gardens, farmers markets and community kitchens are wonderful tools for bringing diverse people together. Neighbors across Australia are welcoming refugees by inviting them over for dinner.

The power of going beyond meetings is evident in Westwood, a Cincinnati neighborhood of 35,000 residents. The Westwood Civic Association has been faithfully meeting for 150 years and advocating with City Hall around issues of crime, zoning and development. While the Civic Association has played a valuable role in a neighborhood with some very real and continuing problems, there were some other neighbors who believed that the primary challenge was to build local pride and participation across their diverse community. They described themselves as a drinking club with a civic problem when they first got together in 2010. Now known as Westwood Works, their pop-up beer gardens, street parties, art shows, movie nights, Saturday morning walks, holiday events and pop-up shops have engaged thousands of residents from all walks of life. In the process, the neighborhood and its business district are becoming revitalized.

Value Everyone

A recent survey sponsored by the Vancouver Foundation showed that half of the respondents found it difficult to make friends and that one-quarter experienced social isolation. Similar results are being reported in other cities around North America. What kind of community closes its door to so many of its neighbors?

There are many causes of social isolation, but one of the keys factors is that these neighbors are regarded as clients of a service system or as neighborhood problems rather than as fellow citizens. When we think of someone as being poor, homeless, disabled, non-English speaking, at-risk, addicted, mentally ill, unemployed or retired, we tend to focus on what that person is missing rather than on the contributions they could make. A truly inclusive neighborhood recognizes that everyone needs community and that community needs everyone.

I recently had the privilege of facilitating a workshop for graduates of the Opening Doors Community Leadership Program in Melbourne. The program is for people who are passionate about social inclusion including many individuals who enrolled because they were feeling excluded. Some of the 130 graduates are using their skills as artists, musicians, and thespians to help the community better understand and connect with people who have been labeled by their deficiencies. Others are leading and teaching in the University of the Third Age which recognizes that everyone has something to teach as well as something to learn whether that is a language, a craft, or how to be a better neighbor.

Network More

Many neighborhood associations recognize that they are insufficiently representative and try to recruit a more diverse membership. The individuals they recruit don’t always feel that welcome, however, because the leadership, agenda, language, culture and relationships have already been established. Moreover, those individuals may feel like tokens with no connection to people who share their perspective. It’s really difficult to get the full diversity of the community adequately represented in a single association.

It’s important to recognize that neighborhood associations are one among dozens of groups, both formal and informal, in every neighborhood. There are people organized around culture, sport, religion, labor, education, public safety, service, business, art, music, dance, history, politics, environment, gardening, youth, seniors, coffee, beer, addiction, cards, books, knitting, dogs, birds, and all sorts of other interests. No one group can adequately represent the neighborhood, but collectively, they can exercise real power.

Saul Alinsky understood this and worked to build neighborhood organizations comprised of local associations such as churches and unions. That’s the approach that we used in organizing the South End Seattle Community Organization (SESCO) in the late 1970s. Half of SESCO’s 26 member groups consisted of neighborhood associations and the other half were faith-based. There was a black Baptist church, a white Lutheran Church, a Japanese Methodist church, a Jewish synagogue, and so on. Each faith-based group, with the exception of the Catholic churches, tended to be pretty homogenous, but working together, SESCO reflected the full rainbow of the community.

It’s probably not possible to bring all of the community groups together, so you need to be strategic. Which groups have a lot of active members? Which groups include people who are currently underrepresented in your association? Meet the leaders of these groups and explore opportunities for collaboration.

Don’t limit yourself to working with groups that share your positions on issues. If you can develop consensus with groups that have been adversaries in the past, you can approach City Hall with a united front and be in a much more powerful position. Most important, if you want to be truly inclusive, look for opportunities to support the voices and initiatives of groups representing neighbors who have suffered from racism and injustice.

Of course, the power of collaboration goes beyond influencing City Hall. It’s also about building on the respective strengths of each group to accomplish those things best done by community. Perhaps the most important role of community is to find ways to better understand and care for one another.

Simon Nielsen 5/10/22 Simon Nielsen 5/10/22

Placemaking For Higher Impact

“To my mind, and many others, every dollar a community invests in infrastructure should be spent with multiple outcomes in mind. Any other way of spending is not only too expensive, but will likely create the kinds of problems that were created when we paid exclusive attention to solving traffic problems simply by building new roads. Or solving flooding by building dams. These approaches didn’t solve the problems – they only made them worse.” Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, examines the high impact of placemaking.

By Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader

I always believed in getting the most bang for the buck (doesn’t everyone?). But if you look at how cities and towns spend money on infrastructure, it’s like money is no object.

I’m thinking of traditional infrastructure spending – the kind which is under much debate currently in Washington. The kind that gets divided up into buckets like public transit, ports and waterways, flood projects, and the perennial favorite “roads and bridges,” the mantra that is said over and over whenever an infrastructure bill is being considered.

It seems like such a dated concept – shouldn’t we be way beyond this one-dimensional approach to investing public money? As my friend Gary Toth often says about roads and highways, “The era of single-purpose public investment is over.” Well, it should be anyway.

To my mind, and many others, every dollar a community invests in infrastructure should be spent with multiple outcomes in mind. Any other way of spending is not only too expensive, but will likely create the kinds of problems that were created when we paid exclusive attention to solving traffic problems simply by building new roads. Or solving flooding by building dams. These approaches didn’t solve the problems – they only made them worse.

Those infrastructure dollars are some of the biggest investments many towns ever see. Why would we spend them with only a single outcome in mind? That money can be spent for multiple outcomes, and not only with greater efficiency, but creating more value in the process.

Case in point: the Indianapolis Cultural Trail, which was conceived as a way to connect and promote the city’s cultural assets downtown. With that core mission in mind, the Central Indiana Community Foundation (CICF) then worked through how it could achieve that, while also achieving (drumroll…):

Six Outcomes, One Project:

1. A vastly safer, more accessible bike and pedestrian environment, in a downtown that had always prioritized cars.

2. Visual beautification through landscaping, public art, and paving treatments that made an aesthetic transformation and drew private investment.

3. Five acres of new linear park space connecting destinations and natural areas with permeable landscape.

4. Stormwater management, through 25,000 square feet of beautiful stormwater planters built into the trail, which minimized the need for sewers.

5. Overall the creation of a distinctive attraction for downtown that would attract visitors and investment, in addition to serving all those frequenting downtown.

6. And….you guessed it, a massive return on investment! Downtown boomed all around the Cultural Trail with increases in retail activity, retail employment, and new development worth an additional $1 billion in property values by 2015, the most recent study I could find.

Check out this short video that gives you a good sense of what Indy accomplished here:

The missing piece here of course was an equity framework, which could have made this an even better project, and which the Trail’s creators have widely acknowledged. In fact, the CICF has since turned its funding almost wholly to working with neighborhoods, somewhat in reaction to the fact that the trail created so much value in downtown, but brought fewer direct benefits to working people in the rest of the city. According to Pamela Ross, vice president of opportunity, equity and inclusion at CICF, “As a community foundation, it’s really important for us to make sure that neighborhoods all across Marion County have an opportunity to have sidewalks, to have safety, to have beautification in their neighborhoods that really represent the faces and the people in those neighborhoods.”

How we spend our next millions, billions, or trillions on infrastructure should be a pressing question that revolves around community outcomes:

Are we improving our sense of place?
Are we improving health outcomes?
Does it improve the environment and address climate change?
Does it support our local economy?
Overall, are we bringing inclusive benefits to all our citizens?
Are we building relationships with residents and allowing them to influence our decisions?

One hundred years after Tulsa, and facing imminent threats from climate change, this kind of multiple-outcome planning is mandatory.

One thing is worth remembering though: a central tenet of placemaking is critical mass around sites that have catalytic potential. How we define catalytic constantly changes with our deepening understanding of our culture, the effects of structural racism, economics, and many other factors, but we don’t want to dilute our impact by spreading investments too thin.

Simon Nielsen 4/25/22 Simon Nielsen 4/25/22

Building 21st Century Community

“Most of our neighborhoods were designed by outside professionals – planners, architects and developers. Increasingly, though, residents are working together to create a unique identity for their neighborhood and to shape places where they can bump into one another on a regular basis.” Community activator, Jim Diers, explores the many ways of building communities fit for the 21st century.

By Jim Diers, community activator

At the turn of this century, Robert Putnam wrote the most depressing book for those of us who believe that there is no substitute for community. Putnam cited all sorts of indicators of the breakdown of social capital over the previous fifty years – closed pubs, fewer voters, less families eating together, and declining membership in Rotary, League of Women Voters, NAACP and other associations. The book was titled Bowling Alone because Putnam documented a dramatic loss in bowling leagues over the years.

I talked about Putnam’s research in a presentation I made to the City Council of Port Phillip, Australia, and they encouraged me to visit the local St. Kilda Bowling Club. Sure enough, when I arrived at the large site next to Luna Park, I saw that the club had closed. In fact, there was a tombstone marking its demise. The inscription read: “Old bowlers never die. They just get composted.” The former bowling club had been converted into a spectacular community garden!

Known as Veg Out, there are dozens of raised beds including one that looks like a pirate ship, another that resembles a ranch, and a garden planted in bathroom fixtures. There’s a food forest, a cactus garden and abundant flowers. But there’s also art everywhere. The old clubhouse is covered in murals and there’s a large yellow submarine on its roof. Inside, artists are working with their neighbors to create more installations for the garden. Already, there are wrought iron gates, mosaic sculptures, a large sundial, a horse built out of garden tools, and a cow whose udders water the plants.

Veg Out is so much more than a garden. There’s a café complete with a wood fired oven and a pub. For the children, there’s a playground with a large sandbox. Children also enjoy the fairy garden with its gigantic toadstools and metal sculptures that move when cranked.

I visited on an especially active Saturday in spring. Children were playing hopscotch, getting their faces painted and visiting a petting zoo. People were eating fresh pizza and salads in the café. Dozens of families were seated on the lawn below a stage featuring local musicians. I’m sure that this was much more activity than the former bowling club had ever seen.

What I have come to realize is that people are finding new ways to build community. Robert Putnam was tracking the old ways. Yes, there may be fewer pubs than there were 50 years ago, but for every pub that has closed, there are many new coffee shops where people connect. Barn raising parties are less needed these days, but neighbors are coming together to build playgrounds. While there may be fewer bowling leagues, there are many more soccer leagues. Following are some of the new forms of community building.

Local Food Movement

Perhaps nowhere illustrates the power of food to build community better than the village of Todmorden, England. Through an initiative called Incredible Edibles, people from all walks of life are working together to raise vegetables everywhere – in the boulevards, the schools, and even the police station. Pamela Wharton who sparked the initiative says: “We are a very inclusive movement. Our motto is, ‘If you eat, you’re in.”

There’s another saying that “Flowers grow in flower gardens, but community grows in community gardens.” Seattle has 95 organic community gardens with 10,000 people participating. Gardeners work together to build and maintain the gardens and to grow and deliver produce to local food banks. Instead of fences to keep people out, every garden has a gathering place to bring neighbors in. These are key bumping places where neighbors can connect on a regular basis and build relationships with one another.

Everywhere in the world I go, I see community gardens. In the small town of Corowa, Australia, retired men were recruited to build the gazebo, frog pond and rain catchment system for the community garden; in the process, they regained a sense of purpose and made good friends. Young people in a Nairobi slum have converted a dump into a garden. Havana has 1700 community gardens and even Singapore, where space is at a premium, boasts more than 1000.

In the Lower Hutt, New Zealand, community members converted an underutilized soccer field at Epuni Primary School into an urban farm. Neighbors worked together to build raised beds, a rain catchment system, a greenhouse from the panels of former slot machines, and even a library designed to look like a hobbit house complete with a green roof. This Common Unity project includes extensive vegetable plots, a food forest, beehives, and chickens. Neighbors assist students in preparing lunches from the farm’s produce so that formerly malnourished children are eating fresh organic meals. A sign at the farm summarizes what community is all about: “We have two hands – one for giving and one for receiving.”

Food forests, urban farms and community kitchens are now common throughout the world. On seven acres of land in the center of Seattle, neighbors are creating the Beacon Food Forest by planting and caring for fruit and nut trees and berry bushes that are available to everyone for picking. Seattle’s Rainier Beach Urban Farm involves East Africans, local high school students, elders with dementia and many more in cultivating ten acres, harvesting 20,000 pounds of produce and preparing 6000 meals in the farm’s community kitchen each year. One of my favorite community kitchens is the Free Cafe in Groningen, Netherlands which serves meals from salvaged food; young people built and operate the facility that includes an artistic kitchen, dining room, living room, library and composting toilets.

Seattle is famous for its historic Pike Place Market where the motto is: “Meet the Producer.” Now, there are farmers markets throughout the city where, in addition to meeting the growers, neighbors can meet and hang out with one another. Similar local markets can be found in cities and villages everywhere. Yes, there may be fewer families eating dinner together than there were 50 years ago, but the local food movement has created so many new opportunities to build social capital.

Environmental Restoration

Ever since the first Earth Day in 1970, communities have organized to safeguard the environment. The water protectors’ courageous actions at Standing Rock are a recent example of the many attempts to hold corporations and government accountable. Increasingly, people are also coming together to undertake their own environmental restoration projects.

In 1994, Ballard was the Seattle neighborhood with the fewest number of street trees and the least park land outside of downtown. Dervilla Gowan responded by organizing her neighbors to plant 1080 street trees in one day. Other neighbors went on to build 20 park projects in as many years – pocket parks, playgrounds, community gardens, ballfields, green streets, a skate park, reforestation of natural areas and restoration of a salmon estuary. Their growing concern with climate change caused them to organize an annual Sustainable Ballardfest and issue undrivers licences which entitle the bearers to ride a foot-powered shufflebus. All of this has sparked a movement. There are now 67 neighborhoods and suburban towns that have joined Ballard to form SCALLOPS - Sustainable Communities All Over Puget Sound.

Taomi, a poor farming community in the mountains of central Taiwan, was at the epicenter of the 1999 earthquake. Amidst all of the devastation, the villagers took stock of their remaining assets and realized that they had abundant birds, butterflies and frogs. They worked together to build ponds and to reforest the land. Fifty famers got trained and certified as eco-tour guides. Young people created art with an environmental theme. For the first time, tourists began to visit. The locals started gardens, restaurants and bed and breakfasts. Now, Taomi is a beautiful eco-village that gets half a million visitors each year and boasts a much healthier economy.

The creeks flowing out of the Waitakere Ranges in west Auckland had become heavily polluted over time and the native bush on the banks had succumbed to all sorts of invasive vegetation. Through Project Twin Streams, neighbors organized to care for their respective sections of the creeks. Thousands of volunteers worked to remove tons of junk from the water. They weeded out the invasives and planted more than 800,000 trees and shrubs since the project began in 2003. Artists worked with children to create murals and sculptures all along the creeks to educate the public and to celebrate the clean water and the return of the native fish, bush and birds.

Such environmental projects usually aren’t one-time affairs. Participants typically meet frequently to maintain and enjoy their contribution to the environment. In the process, they build community.

Community-Created Art

Many cities have long had commissions of experts who select individuals to create public art. There can certainly be value in this top-down approach, but taxpayers often question what the art means and how much it costs. A new approach to public art is on the ascendency. Just as planners, architects, police, public health workers and other professionals are learning how to use their knowledge and skills to empower communities, so are many artists. They are helping neighbors to use art as a way of expressing what is important to them – their history, culture, identity, values, environment or vision for the future. Through working together to conceive and create art, the participants also develop a stronger sense of community. The completed art often is a source of pride for the observers as well and helps them to identify with their community.

There are hundreds of examples of community-created art in Seattle thanks in large part to a Neighborhood Matching Fund that will be described later. One of the early projects was a gigantic troll that resulted from a community vote in the Fremont neighborhood and is now one of Seattle’s most popular landmarks. Residents of Chinatown, Japantown, Manillatown and Little Saigon came together to design 17 dragons climbing utility poles defining a common International District. Gardeners at Bradner Park used mosaic tiles and broken dishes to create spectacular murals on the inside walls of their restroom as a successful strategy to combat vandalism. Neighborhood business districts were revitalized when the West Seattle community developed 15 historical murals for their storefronts and when Columbia City residents painted boarded up doors and windows to depict the businesses that they wanted to attract. Through Urban ArtWorks, artists have mentored over 5000 young people to create more than 1500 murals on walls previously covered with graffiti.

I see similar community creativity everywhere. When I visited an art center in Auckland’s former Corban Estate Winery, young offenders were passionately painting a mural they had designed for a police station and there was a building where homeless Maori were proudly creating art and crafts. In Gosford, Australia, residents handcrafted 40,000 poppies that were installed around Memorial Fountain to commemorate the centenary of the Anzac landing at Gallipoli. Maple Ridge, British Columbia has an Artists in Residency program through which the city makes houses available to artists who work with their neighbors to create installations or stage events such as the River Festival I enjoyed complete with salmon lanterns lighting the way. Nothing good was happening in Tacoma’s Frink Park until someone saw the potential of that concrete-covered space as a canvas; now there is free chalk available every Friday and dozens of people from all walks of life can be seen creating art that visitors enjoy until the next rain.

Placemaking

Most of our neighborhoods were designed by outside professionals – planners, architects and developers. Increasingly, though, residents are working together to create a unique identity for their neighborhood and to shape places where they can bump into one another on a regular basis. Community-created art typically plays a large role in this process of placemaking.

There’s a good example of placemaking in the Newton neighborhood of Surrey, British Columbia. In the center of the business district is a lot covered by very tall trees. Many neighbors complained about the drug dealing, encampments and other public safety concerns hidden in the trees. The police suggested that the sight lines could be improved by clearcutting this mini-forest, but other neighbors had a better idea. They decided to turn the problem space into a community place, and they gave it a name - The Grove. Creative ways were found to use the trees: frames were installed on each tree so that neighbors could display their art; a tightrope was extended between two of the trees; a large stump was painted to serve as a chessboard; word cards were placed on a trunk so that they could be rearranged on what is known as the Poet Tree (three volumes of poetry have now emerged from The Grove). Strings of lights were hung to brighten the environment at night. Neighbors built Encyclopedia House from outdated editions discarded by the library. Local musicians were invited to perform in The Grove. Every major holiday and some minor ones like Groundhog Day are celebrated there. Workshops on everything from poetry writing to seed bombing are accommodated. Welcome signs in every language of that very diverse neighborhood invite people in. And it works! Not only do people feel safe, but The Grove has helped very different people, some of whom had been seen as a problem, to meet one another and build a sense of community.

With the budget cuts in Rotterdam, a neighborhood association was gearing up to fight the closure of their public library. But someone argued that the library wasn’t all that great and that the association’s energy could be better used to create their own place. Community members got excited about this vision and developed the Reading Room in a vacant storefront. It includes a library, café, pub, children’s play area, boxing rink and stage for regular performances. It attracts many more people than the former library and gets them to interact with one another – something that most libraries aren’t programmed to do. Everything in the space was donated and the staff are all volunteers.

Placemaking ideas are spreading rapidly. The Sellwood Neighborhood in Portland, Oregon painted a mural in their intersection in order to slow traffic and create a local identity. They didn’t ask permission from local government, because they knew they wouldn’t get it. The project was so successful, however, that Portland is now one of many cities around the world that permits such murals.

Activists in San Francisco started feeding the parking meters so that they could create gathering places in parking spaces for a day. Now, International PARKing Day is observed in cities everywhere. And, many of those temporary parklets are now permanent. Palmerston North, New Zealand is one city that has many parklets. The local government gives community activists a Placemaking Toolkit which includes a Get Out of Jail Free card “if you unwittingly contravene a regulation in your effort to make your city a better place.”

Culture of Sharing

There’s a lot of talk about the sharing economy these days with the popularity of businesses like Airbnb, Uber and Zipcar. Less heralded but a much greater force in community building is the growing culture of sharing. Unlike the sharing economy, it is tied to relationships rather than money.

One of the simplest expressions of the culture of sharing is the little free library. The first one was built in a small town in Wisconsin in 2009 when Todd Bol wanted to memorialize his mother who had been a schoolteacher and book lover. He built a library shelf designed to look like a schoolhouse, filled it with paperbacks, erected it in his front yard, and invited his neighbors to take and leave books. It proved to be an effective way not only to share reading materials but to help neighbors engage with one another. There are now tens of thousands of such libraries in at least 70 countries and the concept continues to evolve. Red Deer, Alberta even has little free libraries in its public buses.

Although the concept of formal time exchanges is nearly 200 years old, the modern version has really taken off in recent decades. The name and the process differ somewhat from place to place, but they generally operate as time banks. A time bank is a network of neighbors who share their skills to meet one another’s needs. Everyone’s time is valued the same. So, for every hour of service that someone provides, they are entitled to an hour of service that they need from someone else in the network. Not only is it a great way for people get their needs met outside of the monetary system, but it is an effective tool for connecting neighbors who might otherwise be isolated. Time banks are the most prevalent in the United States and United Kingdom, but variations can be found in at least three dozen countries.

The recent proliferation of co-working spaces has also been a major contributor to community building, especially among young people. While most such spaces do require a fee to join, members typically share their expertise freely with one another. I visited such a space in Sioux Falls, South Dakota that was located in a former bakery. The Bakery has plenty of formal and informal working spaces, but it also hosts food trucks, yoga classes, and free workshops offered by the members. The more than 500 young people who belong have formed such a tight community that housing is now being designed for vacant lots around The Bakery so that members can live, learn, work, play and eat all in the same neighborhood.

Similarly, in Columbus, Ohio’s old industrial neighborhood of Frankenton, young people have renovated a former factory as the Idea Foundry. A membership fee gives them access to shared space and equipment such as pottery kilns, welding supplies, and a 3D printer. A nearby warehouse has been turned into 200 artist studios accompanied by a pub, restaurant and performance spaces. Other former industrial buildings now house a glass studio and a brewery. This young entrepreneurial community comes together each year to host Independents’ Days – three days of independent film, music and art.

Social Media

An argument can be made that electronic screens contribute to the breakdown of social capital as face-to-face relationships give way to virtual friends, but social media can also play a role in building community. I’ve done some work in Wyndham, a quickly growing suburb far outside of Melbourne where the community infrastructure hasn’t kept pace with the housing development. Lacking physical bumping places, neighbors turned to Facebook as a way of connecting. A high percentage of the population now belongs to the various neighborhood pages. I heard several powerful stories of neighbors helping one another in times of need even though they had not previously met one another physically.

A key requirement in my community organizing class at the University of Washington is that the students organize around something they are passionate about. One of my students, Megan, said that she had two passions – eating cookies and losing weight. She proceeded to use the Nextdoor social media platform to offer free cookies to residents in her Leschi neighborhood. Megan walked six miles each Sunday delivering the cookies and meeting her neighbors. It turned out that most of them were more interested in the company than in the cookies, and several offered to help with her project. They quickly outgrew Megan’s tiny kitchen, so she put out another message on Nextdoor seeking commercial kitchens. Three churches offered theirs.

Participatory Democracy

The decline in voter participation that Putnam noted has continued, but government officials are starting to wake up and realize that they share much of the blame. A focus on good business practices and customer service over the years has left many people feeling like taxpayers rather than citizens. Tokenistic citizen engagement techniques such as public hearings and task forces have only appealed to the “usual suspects.” Even voting is viewed by many as an exercise in abdicating power. A true democracy requires much more robust and inclusive engagement. Especially at the local level, public officials are realizing the importance of building community and empowering people to make their own decisions and to initiate their own projects.

One of the first cities that devolved power to the people was Porto Alegre, Brazil which initiated an ambitious process of participatory budgeting in 1989. The process starts at the neighborhood level, involves about 50,000 citizens, and determines which projects and services will be supported with the City’s $200 million budget. Cities throughout Brazil replicated this process and now participatory budgeting has taken hold on every continent. In most cities, however, citizens are given a relatively small portion of the budget within which they can propose and prioritize projects.

Many other local governments are empowering citizens to develop their own neighborhood plans. The City of Seattle even made money available so that neighborhoods could hire a planner accountable to them. Rather than start with the City’s budget, this process starts with diverse interests coming together to develop a shared vision for the future of their neighborhood and developing recommendations for actions that will move in that direction. Unlike traditional planning, these bottom-up plans tend to be more holistic, get many more people involved (30,000 in Seattle) and leverage the community’s resources as well as local government’s.

Another tool for leveraging community participation and other resources is the Neighborhood Matching Fund which was developed by the City of Seattle’s Department of Neighborhoods in 1989. The program supports informal groups of neighbors to undertake one-time projects by providing a cash match in exchange for the community’s match of volunteer labor. Through this program, more than 5000 community self-help projects have resulted – new parks, playgrounds, community gardens, public art, cultural centers, renovated facilities, oral histories, etc. The City’s $70 million investment over the years has leveraged $100 million in community contributions that otherwise never would have been tapped. But, the best benefit is that it has involved tens of thousands of citizens with one another and with their government, often for the first time. Now, there are hundreds of such programs around the world but none on the scale of Seattle’s.

Participatory democracy is catching on in many parts of the world. In the Netherlands, where there are numerous examples of community-driven planning and participatory budgeting, the movement is called Burgerkracht (Citizen Power). Machizukuri is the term for community building in Japan; first codified by Kobe City and utilized in recovering from the 1995 earthquake, a similar approach to citizen engagement in the development process has been adopted in other east Asian countries. In New Zealand, the movement is called Community-Led Development and builds on Maori concepts. Australia’s Municipal Association of Victoria sponsors an annual Power to the People conference; there are now many examples of community-led plans and matching fund projects throughout the State of Victoria. In Iceland, Better Reykjavik involved 40% of the population in submitting and voting on ideas via the internet; that success led to an effort to crowdsource a new constitution for the country.

In Canada, there is a focus on building community at the neighborhood level. The Ontario Cities of Burlington, Hamilton, Kitchener, London and Toronto have engaged in widespread consultation to develop comprehensive Neighborhood Strengthening Strategies. The City of Edmonton and smaller jurisdictions throughout Alberta are training block connectors to bring neighbors together around shared interests and for mutual support. In British Columbia, the Vancouver Foundation is working with local governments to make small matching grants available in 17 communities.

Other

Although I have tried to categorize the new forms of community building, I should note that community ways defy categorization. It’s in community that everything comes together, so the approach is typically holistic. For example, Veg Out community garden could be categorized as a local food, environmental or placemaking project or as an example of community-created art or the culture of sharing. Every case cited above could also be described as a public safety or health promotion project because both benefit from stronger social capital. At the same time, there are many new forms of community building that don’t fit in any of the categories I have listed. Here are a few examples.

The increasing frequency and ferocity of floods, droughts, fires, tornados, hurricanes, earthquakes and other disasters throughout the world is prompting communities to take the initiative in preparing for disaster. Neighbors are meeting one another, sharing their contact information, and making plans to combine their skills, equipment and other resources so that they can be as resilient as possible. Vashon Island, Washington, where I live, has 200 Neighborhood Emergency Response Organizations. Volunteers also created and operate a network of ham radios, a Facebook page, and radio and television stations for emergency communication; in the meantime, these media play a significant role in further building the community connections that are key to resiliency.

Neighbors are finding new ways to support their elders so that they can age in place. In a small village outside of Hoogeveen in the Netherlands, neighbors renovated a former restaurant to serve as an assisted-living facility staffed largely by volunteers. The other elders are supported to stay in their homes by neighbors who serve as “Buddies” – making regular visits, providing rides, and helping to maintain the house and yard. Neighbors are playing a similar role in cities throughout the United States where Virtual Villages have been organized. Started in Boston, this model also helps isolated seniors to connect with community and offers concierge-like referrals for those services that can’t be provided by volunteers.

Collective knitting may seem like a frivolous activity by comparison, but it is also playing a role in rebuilding community. Knitting groups are popping up everywhere whether their purpose is to knit apparel for newborns, pussy hats for the Women’s March, or blankets for homeless encampments or to create street art through yarn bombing. In the Voorstad neighborhood of Deventer in the Netherlands, eight women came together to socialize while they knitted scarves in the yellow and red of their beloved football team, the Go Ahead Eagles. The movement grew and soon there were knitting groups everywhere, even in the football stadium. Several months ago, they sewed the scarves together and completely covered a house to show the warmth they have for the Syrian refugees who live inside. Their current goal is to make a scarf so long that it can surround the entire neighborhood; the 185 men and women participating in this project are three kilometers of the way towards knitting their community together.

I hope that you are as heartened by all of this as I am. Community isn’t an old-fashioned concept. We need it now more than ever. But, if we are going to build stronger communities, we can’t hark back to the old ways. We’re living in a different world, and we need to adapt our approaches accordingly. Fortunately, people are stepping up everywhere and continually finding new ways to connect with others. I can’t imagine a more exciting time than this for building community.

Simon Nielsen 3/22/22 Simon Nielsen 3/22/22

If You Want To Build Community, Start Where The People Are

“Police departments typically fail to understand that the safest blocks are the ones that focus not on safety but on building community. Rather than simply teach people how to be secure in their homes and watch for strangers, residents should be encouraged to get out of their homes and connect with neighbors on a regular basis.” Community activator, Jim Diers, lets us in on a shortcut to healthier, happier, more caring and wiser neighborhoods.

By Jim Diers, community activator

A fundamental principle of community organizing is to start where the people are. The closer you engage people to where they live, the more likely they are to get involved. You should be able to get successively larger turnouts for gatherings at the neighborhood, city, state and national levels, but the percentage of the population engaged will most likely be the highest at the street, block, building or floor level.

Why? Because the farther the action is from where someone lives, the more likely they are to expect others to take responsibility. If it’s on their street, however, who will step up if they don’t? Logistics like transportation and child care are so much easier. And, their participation will generate peer pressure for the rest of the neighbors to join in. Most importantly, neighbors are likely to enjoy immediate and ongoing benefits from their participation due to the small scale and the relationships that are built with people who are so accessible. There’s no need to expend energy on bylaws, minutes, treasurer’s reports, nominating committees, and Roberts Rules of Order; the focus is on community.

The Opzoomeren Movement

I recently witnessed the potential of block organizing in Rotterdam where the Opzoomeren movement has taken hold. It started in 1994 when the residents of Opzoomer Street got fed up waiting for local government to address problems of crime and blight. They came to realize that there was much that the neighbors themselves could do, and they decided to take action.

Today, about 1600 streets are following their example. Neighbors come together to do whatever is most important to them whether that is caring for latchkey children and housebound elders, planting trees and gardens, or organizing street parties. Because half of Rotterdam’s population is immigrants, neighbors are often engaged in teaching one another Dutch.

On many of the streets, neighbors have gathered to discuss how they can best support one another. They develop a code of conduct that is prominently displayed on a large sign. No two signs are the same although there are some frequent themes. A typical sign reads:

1. We say hello and welcome new neighbors.

2. We take part in all kinds of street activities.

3. We help each other with childcare.

4. We keep our neighborhood clean and safe.

Each May, all of the streets celebrate Opzoomeren Day. In order to be recognized as part of the movement, a street must undertake at least four events or projects each year. An Opzoomeren bus is available for neighbors to use as a pop up café, gallery, workshop site, or whatever.

The Limitation of Block/Neighborhood Watch Programs

Of course, street level organizing is not a new idea. Practically everywhere I go, there are long standing crime prevention groups known as block or neighborhood watch.

Seattle has had one of the most successful block watch programs. First organized in 1972, the Police Department now claims that approximately 3000 blocks, or 30% of the city, is participating. In August of each year, about 1400 block parties are held in observance of National Night Out Against Crime.

The shortcoming of the program, however, is its singular focus on crime. Neighbors typically get engaged when it is too late – after there have been house break-ins or other safety issues. They call the Police Department for support and are taught how to install security systems and watch out for strangers. After that initial meeting, the group often becomes dormant until there is another crime wave.

Police departments typically fail to understand that the safest blocks are the ones that focus not on safety but on building community. Rather than simply teach people how to be secure in their homes and watch for strangers, residents should be encouraged to get out of their homes and connect with neighbors on a regular basis. It is much more sustainable for people to engage with one another around their wide range of interests rather than the police department’s narrow public safety agenda. That’s another key aspect of starting where the people are. In recognition of this, New Zealand’s program has morphed from neighborhood watch to Neighborhood Support.

Neighbors Provide Mutual Support

There is so much that neighbors can do to connect with one another and provide mutual support. Emergency planning is one such activity. Christchurch Mayor Lianne Dalziel told me that one of the most important lessons from their devastating earthquakes was the importance of neighbors knowing one another. With limited emergency workers and many impassable roads, most Christchurch residents were totally dependent on the skills, resources, and care of their neighbors in the immediate aftermath of the earthquakes.

I now live on Vashon Island, Washington which is highly susceptible to earthquakes. Over 200 groups of five to fifteen households each have self-organized in this rural community in order to develop and implement emergency plans. Frequent power outages and other winter storm damage provide ample opportunity to practice mutual support. On our street, for example, some neighbors used their chainsaws to remove downed trees while others prepared a kind of stone soup; the ingredients came from everyone’s thawing freezers and the stew was prepared and served in a warm house equipped with a generator. Fortunately, we didn’t need the skills and knowledge of the physician who is also part of our group.

There are so many other ways in which neighbors can support one another on a daily basis. On some streets, elders have buddies who check on them each day and provide the transportation and maintenance that enables them to stay in their homes. And, for young parents, there are babysitting cooperatives. Neighbors share their expertise with one another whether that involves technology, recycling, gardening, auto mechanics, or whatever.

I visited a street in Garland, Texas where many of the neighbors worked in the construction trades – there was at least one carpenter, plumber, electrician, bricklayer, and roofer. They conducted regular work parties to help one another with their house projects. Those who lacked skills to help with construction prepared lunch or supervised the children. A couple of the neighbors had built bars in their back yards so that everyone could socialize after a day of work.

The Value of Bumping Places

Gathering spaces are essential to building community. I like to call them bumping places because the best way to build relationships is to have places where neighbors can bump into one another on a regular basis. The closer those bumping places are to where you live, the more likely it is that you will continually bump into the same people.

There are many opportunities to create bumping places on a street. A vacant lot or underutilized yard can be converted into a community garden or pocket park. A little free library combined with a bench becomes an instant bumping place. In the Taiwan village of Tugo, residents have turned their front yards into small parks with tables that are shared with their neighbors. I met a man in Matsudo, Japan who had given up his valuable private parking place in order to redevelop it as a community gathering place complete with seating, fountain and artwork created by the children of the neighborhood.

In the Sellwood neighborhood of Portland, Oregon, neighbors converted their intersection into what they call Share-It Square, a most unusual bumping place. They painted a large mural in the intersection in order to slow traffic and provide a sense of place. Then, at each corner, they built a cob structure including a bench, a community bulletin board, a children’s playhouse, and a place where people can deposit and retrieve all sorts of free items. There is also a stand for a thermos of hot tea that entices neighbors to sip and talk together.

The Share-It Square neighbors didn’t seek the city’s permission before they painted the intersection, because they knew they wouldn’t get it. The project has been so successful, though, that the City of Portland now permits similar projects in other neighborhoods. And, the idea of painting intersections has spread around the world from the Cathedral neighborhood in Sioux Falls to the Riccarton neighborhood of Christchurch.

Connecting Neighbors through Events

Events are another way to connect neighbors at the street level. On the Fourth of July in Tacoma, Washington, residents are encouraged to barbeque in their front yards as a way of welcoming neighbors to join them. In other places, neighbors are invited to watch movies projected onto the side of someone’s house. Several rural communities in Australia have festivals in which all of the households along the road are encouraged to create unique scarecrows out of straw; neighbors walk the road together enjoying one another’s creativity.

In Kitchener and Waterloo, Ontario, there are several neighborhoods in which the houses have large front porches. They hold annual concerts featuring a band on each porch. Neighbors are invited to sit on the lawn and enjoy the music. I attended one such event that featured 44 bands with very different styles of music playing on 22 porches over the course of an afternoon.

Building Blocks for Larger Civic Action

Street-level organizing can produce the building blocks needed for larger civic action. Some neighborhood associations develop a broad base of participation by having their board members elected from each street. The street representative’s job is to ensure good two-way communication and to mobilize their constituency as needed.

The City of Redmond, Washington used this decentralized approach to maximize public input into policy decisions. Rather than rely solely on the testimony of the “usual suspects” who attend public hearings, they produced videos on key issues under consideration. Those videos were made available for house meetings at the block level and the ensuing discussions engaged people who would never think of speaking in the city council chambers. Feedback from the house meetings helped inform decision making by elected officials.

Oftentimes, the best way to build a campaign is house by house and block by block. For example, on the issue of climate change, neighbors can be given a menu of actions for reducing their family’s carbon footprint. Each action is worth a certain number of points. If the family can demonstrate sufficient points, they are given a yard sign identifying them as a green household. When green signs start spreading up and down the street, everyone is more likely to want to get on board. Similar approaches have been utilized in creating drug free, nuclear free and hate free zones.

One of the best things about block organizing and one of the greatest challenges is that the neighbors often have more differences (e.g. race, culture, age, religion, politics, career) than are likely to be found in other types of community that are organized around a common identity or interest. Some local places celebrate the unity of their diversity through common signage. The residents of the Croft Place apartments in Seattle’s Delridge neighborhood did that as each family painted a placard hung above their door featuring their name and representing their culture. Similarly, on a street in Taiwan’s Taoyuan City, each household has a placard depicting the kind of work that their family does. In Roombeek, a suburb of Enschede in the Netherlands, houses on one street each have a display case showcasing what is special about the family that lives there.

Agencies as Facilitators of Local Connections

Street organizing works best when it starts with the interests of the residents themselves, but there is a role that outside agencies can play in helping to foster connections. In Lawrence, Massachusetts, for example, a community development corporation trained interested residents on how to build a block organization. Upon completion of the training, the participants were given vouchers to acquire the ingredients for three dinners that they hosted for their neighbors. Over dinner, they discussed their dreams, challenges and gifts and developed plans for supporting one another. The resulting block organizations also proved to be a good vehicle for voter registration and turnout.

In Portland, Oregon, a non-profit called City Repair provides a mobile bumping place known as the T-Horse. When the converted van arrives on a street, gigantic wings are installed on either side of the T-Horse to provide protection from sun or rain. Inside the van, they make tea and serve it to the neighbors who sit on cushions under the wings and get to know one another.

Many cities make it very difficult to organize street parties due to the time and expense involved in acquiring the required food handling and street closure permits. But some local governments, like Airdrie and Grande Prairie, Alberta and Burlington, Ontario, realize that they have an interest in building community. They make the regulatory process as simple as possible and even supply block party toolkits that include equipment and/or money to help with the event.

The City of Seattle has a Small Sparks fund which facilitates residents who feel isolated to connect with their neighbors. For example, one mother and her child with disabilities used the money to purchase a wagon that they pulled door to door as a magazine exchange. Another individual noticed that all of the falling apples on her street were attracting rats, so she purchased a press and invited her neighbors to help make cider. A lonely senior in a high rise apartment invited the neighbors in the surrounding houses to the community room on the top floor where they had a great time folding paper airplanes and tossing them out the window.

Many cities throughout the world sponsor a Neighbor Day as a way to encourage and celebrate caring neighbors. Among other things, the City of Seattle organizes a contest for students to depict pictures of caring neighbors. The winning entry gets printed on the cover of a greeting card and the inside message simply says, “Thank you, neighbor!” Thousands of people utilize these cards as an excuse to visit their neighbors and let them know that they are appreciated.

Building community in dense, high-rise housing can be challenging, but again, agencies can play a role in facilitating connections. Over 80 percent of Singapore’s population lives in multi-story buildings constructed and managed by the Housing Development Board (HDB). HDB has made community building a priority. They include community gathering spaces in their developments and make funds available to support community-driven place-making projects. An annual Buildathon trains practitioners on how to work in ways that are community-led, and a Community Week recognizes good neighbors and exemplary community projects.

A promising, relatively new tool for block organizing is the Abundant Community Initiative being implemented by the City of Edmonton and other municipalities. Utilizing a strengths-based approach, Block Connectors are recruited and trained to have conversations that uncover the gifts, needs, passions and dreams of their neighbors. The information and relationships that emerge through this process lead to the formation of interest and activity groups, skills exchanges, and a vision for the neighborhood. The work is done under the auspices of the local community leagues and helps them to be more deeply rooted in each of their neighborhoods.

Thus, neighborhood associations and agencies alike are learning that a top-down approach to citizen engagement doesn’t work. If you really want to get broad and inclusive participation, you need to start where people are – as close to their home and their heart as possible. Of course, starting where people are also entails starting with their language and culture and with their pre-existing networks, but those are topics for future blogs.

Simon Nielsen 3/21/22 Simon Nielsen 3/21/22

Realizing The Promise Of Knowledge Communities

“College campuses are the original “innovation district,” offering a rich density of minds that are concentrated for maximum intake and output of thought. The assumption is always that these minds will meet in serendipitous encounters and campus meeting places. But the reality often falls far short and campuses need to be much more intentional about creating the collision spaces where these interactions can happen.” Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, lists the many benefits of campus placemaking.

By Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader

I visited the University of Texas, Austin recently, and was elated to see how alive and abundant campus life was, centered on a fairly new campus space, the Speedway Mall. It’s a great example of campus placemaking, and captures the spirit of campus life that so many other campuses aspire to.

Campuses are built around the notion of a knowledge community – putting people together to induce the exchange of ideas, not only between student and teacher, but across an intricate network that touches all members. Hopefully.

And yet, it doesn’t always work out that way. Many campuses lack a sense of place and most campuses underrate the importance of the “life between buildings,” treating their public spaces as an afterthought, or as grassy backdrops.

There’s no excuse for this. The reasons for college administrators to make the most of their campus public realm are many and compelling:

Campus Sense of Place and Meaning

Colleges and universities should strive to create vibrant and memorable places that give deeper meaning to campus residents and bring them back years later for reunions, for visits with children in tow, for future giving. Harvard University realized this when they incorporated Placemaking in the master planning of the new Allston Campus. They were aware of the danger that the new campus, although walking distance from the fabled Harvard Yard, would feel like another world with none of the soul and beauty that the older campus is so known for. Harvard continues its work with placemaking on both the Cambridge campus as well as the Allston campus.

Campuses as Innovation Districts

College campuses are the original “innovation district,” offering a rich density of minds that are concentrated for maximum intake and output of thought. The assumption is always that these minds will meet in serendipitous encounters and campus meeting places. But the reality often falls far short and campuses need to be much more intentional about creating the collision spaces where these interactions can happen. Such encounters and casual meetings are much more likely when they are planned for, and the programming that goes along with placemaking is a powerful tool for campuses to use.

Creating Places of Diversity

Planning for interactions must also account for people of different races and cultural backgrounds on campus. In fact, one of the best ways to diversify the groups that gather -- and to make campus places more inclusive – is to target specific audiences who might otherwise not feel welcome. To quote the Brookings Institution: “If public spaces are designed and managed for a monolithic “public” or “average user,” they will likely be exclusionary and fail to achieve their goals of engendering social cohesion.”

Activating Campus Places

There are so many campus spaces that are literally just hardware with limited purpose. To breathe life into a campus, a significant budget should be saved for programming to attract people, enliven campus, improve bodies and minds, and actually put facilities to their best use.

Campus Placemaking

This notion of a knowledge community is an old one – it goes all the way back to the establishment of cities as the most efficient way to capture talent, foster innovation, and grow economies. It applies to university and college campuses, but also research campuses, medical campuses, innovation districts, and other urban districts.

There are layers of social and civic infrastructure that are invisible to most professionals in planning, design, and development. When these layers are overlooked, we miss an opportunity to enrich lives and build community – or in the case of universities, the chance to create a knowledge community that fosters exchange and innovation and builds rich student life. This is where placemaking comes in, and why it’s a valuable addition to campus planning and design.

Simon Nielsen 3/11/22 Simon Nielsen 3/11/22

Welcoming Locals With The Civic Park Groundbreaking

“The mantra during this entire period has been, roughly, ‘build downtown for locals, not tourists. We’ve been pushed out by the tourists for too long.’ The return of locals only seems right, for what is one of America’s very oldest cities with a totally unique and authentic culture.” Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, has been a driving force in the transformation of downtown San Antonio into a more welcoming place.

By Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader

At long last San Antonio’s new Civic Park broke ground on January 26, 2022. This public-private project will create downtown’s most significant park space and has been called “perhaps the most ambitious development in San Antonio history when you consider the cost, scale and location.” I was thrilled to be able to work with Hemisfair and GGN to help develop the vision for this park.

The initial master plan for this former World’s Fair site, dubbed Hemisfair, was done as far back as 2012, led by Johnson Fain with Olin, HR&A, and Arup. In the following years three public spaces were envisioned and designed, by firms such as MIG, GGN and the Project for Public Spaces:

· Yanaguana Garden, a six-acre mixed use destination playground, was opened to the public for the first time in October 2015 and has come to become the second most visited park per acre in Texas with more than 80 percent of the visitors being locals.

· Civic Park, at 12 acres, is the largest of the three spaces, and will feature civic events like concerts, with tree-lined promenades, fountains and pools, and a perimeter of shopping, dining, hotel and residential.

· Tower Park will mix public space with more than a dozen historic structures, in the last phase of Hemisfair’s development.

Phil Myrick was the placemaking lead on all three projects, helping to establish the overall vision and program.

Tourism and suburbanism

Yanaguana Garden, Civic Park, and Tower Park all have a common thread – and that is to serve and attract local people above all others. For San Antonio, this is a deep-rooted obligation due to the fact that for fifty years the city’s downtown has been mainly the haunt of tourism. The River Walk, a flood project begun under WPA and constructed over a span of decades, eventually became one of the world’s most iconic public spaces. But over time it succeeded especially as a tourist destination, and most locals visit once or twice a year.

Meanwhile, San Antonio’s downtown never recovered from the urban malaise that affected all U.S. cities in the late 20th century, and the city has remained adamantly suburban. For decades, while the River Walk was teeming with visitors, up at the street level the city was a ghost town, characterized by overly-engineered streets that made walking a chore, and an almost complete dearth of retail or residents.

The Decade of Downtown

But, over the last 15 years or so, a devoted and passionate group of city leaders, developers, civic boosters, historians, and most recently the University of Texas, have helped create a surge of investment in making downtown a better place to live. This momentum was given a significant boost in 2010 when Mayor Julián Castro announced his “Decade of Downtown,” an initiative that left an indelible legacy.

Although in 2022 it is still behind the curve (other major cities enjoyed their comeback of downtown many years ago), San Antonio’s downtown momentum has now passed a tipping point. I predict this sleeper of a downtown will soon emerge as America’s latest downtown darling, a success story long in the making.

Build downtown for locals

The mantra during this entire period has been, roughly, “build downtown for locals, not tourists. We’ve been pushed out by the tourists for too long.” The return of locals only seems right, for what is one of America’s very oldest cities with a totally unique and authentic culture. Steeped in a brew of Mexican, Native American, and Texian roots, the city is deeply comfortable with its multiculturalism, and the city has long been majority Hispanic (over 60% Hispanic in the 2020 census).

With this amiable diversity and renewed commitment to downtown, San Antonio represents America’s past, present and future in the best possible way. A toast to the Civic Park, the city’s latest undertaking in a decade of authentic placemaking.

Simon Nielsen 3/10/22 Simon Nielsen 3/10/22

Treasure Hunting On Campus

Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, invites us to turn our campuses inside out and go find the hidden treasures.

“Students and professors are no different from the rest of us. They want to live or work in a place that is stimulating, comfortable, safe and social. But this has too often been ignored in the way campuses have been planned or adapted in recent decades. Billions of dollars go into building facilities that are hidden behind blank walls. That can make for a cutting-edge education, but a lackluster student experience with few chances for exchange.” Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader, invites us to turn our campuses inside out and go find the hidden treasures.

By Phil Myrick, global placemaking leader

Ask anyone embarking on a development or building project about their goals, and not many will list mediocrity among them.

Ask them if they want to build a great place, and of course their answer will be yes.

Too often, though, the architectural design process overlooks the quotidian pleasures we all unconsciously seek in favor of the big, shiny and impressive. How can we reclaim the soul of the places that make us who we are if this is the process that continues?

And, if this process continues, what kind of people will we become as we live, work, and study in these “soulless” spaces?

Inclusion or compartmentalization?

Let’s look at an example of “What’s Possible” as opposed to “How it’s Always Been Done.”

Think of a university. So much opportunity. So much capacity for achieving great places. Too often, though they don’t even seem to realize what they’ve got, let alone what’s possible.

If asked, most universities would likely agree on the importance of promoting student life in multiple dimensions. Too many times, though, this philosophy doesn’t survive the planning and design process.

Too often, the result is that faculty and students are relegated to their shiny rectangle, put back into their disciplines, hidden from each other. Natural interaction is next to impossible.

We could all benefit from cross-fertilization and collaboration more than ever, yet campuses often miss their opportunity to do this better than anyplace else.

Students and professors are no different from the rest of us. They want to live or work in a place that is stimulating, comfortable, safe and social. But this has too often been ignored in the way campuses have been planned or adapted in recent decades. Billions of dollars go into building facilities that are hidden behind blank walls. That can make for a cutting-edge education, but a lackluster student experience with few chances for exchange.

If even a fraction of these investments were used to express the building’s program to the exterior, it would make a vast difference to the day-to-day experience of campus.

Sharing the wealth through campus placemaking

The key to making campuses more than the sum of their parts is in clustering outdoor activities with expressive buildings that contribute their content to the outside. The goal should be to create busy, dynamic destinations for many different types of people throughout the day and week.

For example, at the University of Texas San Antonio they’ve made a good start at creating an outdoor space outside the food court, with seating under the oak trees, Wi-Fi access, a small stage and screen capabilities (see photo). They only need to push it a little further, perhaps with an outdoor bar and food truck, and more options for seating. Then add some live music, care of the Department of Music, and you get an amazing and memorable campus hotspot, with only modest effort.

UTSA and I will work together over the coming months to create more of these hotspots for campus life.

This is a way to bring people together instead of confining them in the prisons of their chosen discipline. It encourages dialogues instead of monologues.

And, when we talk to each other, the resulting ideas and innovations benefit us all.

Breaching the ivory tower

But inclusion doesn’t stop at the educational castle walls.

A campus that sits all by itself, cut off from the commerce and life of the local community also falls short of its potential impact.

Some of America's most beloved campuses feature adjoining business districts that teem with activity. Think of Harvard Square, State Street in Madison, and Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley.

Savannah College of the Arts and the College of Charleston, like many European colleges, have woven their buildings into the fabric of downtown neighborhoods rather than standing apart on their own “hallowed” ground.

For the good of the students as well as for the community in general, we need to see cross-fertilization between universities and the broader community.

There must be places where audiences mix.

Case in point

While working at Project for Public Spaces many years ago we led a process to add a layer to the master plan for Harvard’s expansion into Allston. Engagement included workshops with students, faculty, and staff, as well as Allston residents.

The intent was to create a series of shared spaces that would encourage interaction between the university’s students, faculty, and staff as well as the residents of Harvard and Allston.

Community gathering places were planned around key campus buildings, such as a library, an arts center, a dining hall, and Harvard Stadium.

The goal was to develop new destinations that would intentionally integrate all kinds of people as the campus was built out. Cluster the right uses, and you can plan for who will show up and how well they will mingle. Build for the future of the university, but also build in ways that brings life to the surrounding community.

Capturing value

What’s my point?

Go on a treasure hunt.

Millions of dollars go into building facilities that hide their assets behind blank walls. If a tiny part of that investment was directed toward creating a place on the building’s exterior, it would make a vast difference to people's experiences both on and off campus.

Universities have vast capacity for doing more with their treasures – their music programs, their lectures, their many collections that are stored in basements.

A “treasure hunt” involving staff and faculty to better express these opportunities will benefit everyone in the community, and the experience of the campus at large.

A treasure is only a treasure when someone digs it up.

Simon Nielsen 3/3/22 Simon Nielsen 3/3/22

Placemaking.Education

Town Team Movement and PlacemakingX are inviting you to become a placemaker with the launch of Placemaking.Education, a new online learning platform bringing placemaking to all corners of the world.

Placemaking is an inclusive and collaborative process, a mindset, an attitude that brings people, disciplines and organisations together to create positive changes to an area (small, medium or large). It aims to create places that people want to be in and where humans thrive. It is a process that can strengthen the fabric of a neighbourhood or community. Placemaking empowers people to act, not only as an ethical principle, but also because it is a real way to improve the way a person relates to themselves, their neighbours and their world.

Town Team Movement and PlacemakingX are inviting you to become a placemaker with the launch of Placemaking.Education, a new online learning platform bringing placemaking to all corners of the world.

By Town Team Movement & PlacemakingX

What is placemaking?

It sounds like a buzz word, but it is actually a vital and practical way to create successful, resilient places, empowered citizens and more connected communities.

Town Team Movement and the global leader of the placemaking movement, PlacemakingX, have partnered to create the world’s first online education platform with structured training courses to help you learn more about placemaking.

We have collected and curated the most important placemaking concepts, tips and lessons learned into one place to make it easier and faster for you to learn.

Learn at your own pace, when you want, where you want!

“Placemaking is like turning a house into a home.”

— David Engwicht, Placemaking Leader

Placemaking is a philosophy and an iterative, collaborative process for creating public spaces that people love and feel connected to.

Placemaking is about creating feelings in people. It's about making a public space, street or even a whole suburb "feel like home" - a place to feel good in, to belong to and be proud of.

Placemaking empowers people to act, not only as an ethical principle, but also because it is a real way to improve the way a person relates to themselves, their neighbours and their world.

Online placemaking training courses

Placemaking.Education has various online courses that you can take anywhere, anytime! Learn at your own pace. The course content includes topics such as:

What is placemaking?
Why is placemaking important?
What are the principles of placemaking?
What are some examples of placemaking?
Who can be a placemaker?
Where can placemaking be done?
How can you make it happen?

Visit Placemaking.Education

Simon Nielsen 2/22/22 Simon Nielsen 2/22/22

Slow Down, Look Around

“You know public spaces are a source of free entertainment. And honestly, I love this aspect of public or outdoor places. But what is entertainment and why is it important? Entertainment generally means “an event, performance, or activity designed to provide amusement or enjoyment to others.” So basically, it’s an act that gives you joy and some good time.” Peacemakers Pakistani.

By Peacemakers Pakistani

Have you ever noticed yourself rushing from one destination to another? Being in movement not only physically but also mentally. Picturing your next destination and chores you have to do and people you have to see and meeting you have to attend, or presentation you have to give or lecture you have to attend… This kind of rush???

Like in real desperation to be where you want to be… To just reach there and the crowd fades away… The traffic, “Oh my God, why are there so many cars on the road” “I am in hurry, let my car pass through” “Get out of my sight you lazy drive”… Ahh! These slow drivers! “Where are you coming man, let me just go through” “Oh my, is it time to fight???” “Is it time to block the road?” “Oh man!” This signal! “Why are there signals?” “I am going to be late, definitely”. Like the real deal to just get out of your vehicle and get your chores done… That tick tock kind of thing on your mind…

Have you ever noticed? Well if you did, it’s okay. You are normal. We all do have same tick tock situation because we live in real busy urban world…

But what if, today, you just slow down… To observe! To not rush! To breathe! To just look around! The term slow is a movement or action at a relaxed or leisurely pace. Drop that fast pace of yours! And slow down to take in the essence of happenings around you… In the city you live… About the people you share common traditions with… About the environment we all breathe in…

At hawkers with colourful objects, or kids either going to Madrassas or playing out at streets, or a family on a bike, or an old man passing by, or at shop owners setting up, waiting for customer or laughing together at regular jokes…

Maybe you will reach your destination a moment late… But you might be less stressful or a less frustrated… Maybe you will find yourself smiling or maybe your forehead crease will be a little smoother… And trust me, you will feel good, certainly! I am saying it because I do… every time... When I slow down & observe & feel!

Look around! You may find different stories happening around you. And why you must do that? When you have so much work to do. Well…

You know public spaces are a source of free entertainment. And honestly, I love this aspect of public or outdoor places. But what is entertainment and why is it important? Entertainment generally means “an event, performance, or activity designed to provide amusement or enjoyment to others.” So basically, it’s an act that gives you joy and some good time. That’s why it is important because it’s a matter of your joy in daily life. There are various methods of entertainment & various types of entertainers. We all may have different interests and thus different memories.

One of my favourite childhood entertainment memory is a man with a monkey (Bandar aur Dugdugi). A monkey which does acts on his trainer’s command & makes people laugh & admire its intelligence. I can still remember that dugdugi’s tuktuk in my mind… An exciting & cheerful memory! I have happened to see a tamed bear in my street as well!

Oh... But how come you have not seen the funniest incident of monkey jumping onto people’s car on traffic signal while its trainer asks for some money. Oh my! All those screaming passengers!!!

Then, there are those musical entertainers we see in television & movies performing in squares & streets. Even though, in Pakistan, we don’t have this culture. But how can you forget the “Dhol wala group”??? The drum beaters checking their instruments or practising along green belts is such a delight. Just hearing the beat of familiar sound makes me smile… I often come across this type of entertainment at Ferozepur Road & Wahdat Road intersection and Allaho Chowk.

And if you can hear that sound & visually recall dhamal and bhangra moves, then credit goes to you. As you had paid attention to your surroundings, once & then it was stored in your memory…

Hey, do you recall the loud vendors passing through the streets? Then you must have realised that your street is a public space and it doesn’t belong to you alone but to all and thus you got to bear noise of people moving, kids playing or fighting, vendors calling out “gheeya, tinday, aalo, tamatar le lo….” “Machine theek kara lo…” “Loha raddi de do…” And some real time entertainers actually having punch lines to seek your attention to their stall or they might even sing a complete song to sell their items or maybe to enjoy while they sell what they have to… I recall this:

لسی ٹھنڈی ٹھار اے

لسی دی بهار اے

لسی مزے دار اے

I have another reason. Have you ever find yourself reading & loving the messages your city has to tell you? Well, of course by city I mean its people - who else will write or display those messages – it’s by people indeed. People who got enough of time to do something that can entertain or make others feel joy. Not all are here to entertain you or give in their time & thought for you. You know.

So, the messages! Yes. Yes. Exactly... Those behind the trucks & rickshaws... Let's have a look at some awesome messages...

"ماواں ٹھنڈیاں چھاواں"

"Mother as a cool shade"

"یہ میرے ماں باپ کی دعائیں ہیں"

"These are my parent's prayers."

You see, the sense of gratitude towards parents. It's constant reminder that one needs all time... Haven't you ever felt gratitude towards your own parents when you come across such messages?

Some sort of self expressionism is also evident in these displays. Like:

سڑک سے دوستی سفر سے یاری دیکھ پیارے زندگی ہماری

I befriend the road, my companion is the journey. Look at my life, dear.

آغازِ جوانی ہے ہم جھوم کے چلتے ہیں لوگ سمجھتے ہیں ہم پی کے چلتے ہیں

I swagger because I am young; the world thinks I reel because I'm drunk.

They are also used as mobile or moving advertisements on public transport. It makes one journey on road - thoughtful, interesting & fun. And the reason why I like to see them is...

I highly appreciate the penmanship of people belonging to Pakistan. Like real time thing, real talent! Similarly the truck art is also an artist exhibiting his talent leaving it onto road. Not preserving his masterpiece but letting it get dirty or scratched or worse but fulfilling its duty of carrying loads to its place while amazing people with its colours along the way. Well, don't think I am distracted I am just highlighting an important part of Pakistan here.

Not all sources of entertainment require money or debit card, some only requires your attention, sensory involvement and an appreciation to the entertainers. They need you to see, hear, feel, think and respond. So are you willing to be attentive in the present moment?

You see how Pakistani or Desi people just express even serious things in funny ways… Well, for me, I see them as a sign of optimism & happiness. It sparks joy in me & make me feel love for such messages. And I find kind of comfort in them. Like assurance by my own people and something I have been seeing my entire life and its never outdated. Doesn’t it move you that how people are sharing their creativity in amazing ways & also for free??? Aren’t they all entertainers??? Who doesn’t need such entertainment for free?

It makes me able to put my guards down. I am not alone on the road, there are other people as well, and they are communicating in different ways. It also makes me feel good because at least some people are confidently owning & sharing what they are, in real & they aren’t insecure to let the world know what they want to say out loud. What if we all just recognise our power of sharing the words of wisdom, joy or creativity, and communicating with others?… How interesting this world can be…(some personal sentiments included consciously)

But, hey! This is not the only form of how our people share messages with us…. Ever noticed, flowers & vines in the balconies & terraces & lawns and flowers on the greenbelts??? Like, people sharing their love for nature & its beauty with the world rather than material bricks, paints alone or rigid facades… Do they not add calming effect to your mind? I see it as a good deed – providing comfort to someone just passing by.

You like it what I just shared with you, right? So just slow down! Start enjoying life by being conscious of sensory plethora. Let public place activate your senses to full potential so it can store incidents in memory & make you smile even if it’s not physically there anymore. Or that memory shall invite you to visit the place again with its sound… And if you can recall any sound while reading this, you are truly amazing!

May this happen all in goodness… May you have a good day today & tomorrow. May your journey be a cheerful one. May you not risk your life while rushing today. Amen

Have wonderful time & memories while noticing the world around you! May you find interesting & soulful entertainers out there… Remember! You can find real joy around yourself… If you are ready to find it for free.

And ending with a quote... Sharing with you what’s popular lifestyle trend in the world nowadays: “Slow Living”

“It’s about knowing and passionately loving the things we value. And designing our lives to spend the most time possible enjoying them. It’s about having intention and consciousness in our activities. About escaping the mindless scrolling and unproductive multi-tasking and focusing on purposeful action.” –Kayte Ferris

Be the part of right trend because Now is the Time! Fall in love with your surroundings and yourself. Will you?

Introduction: Midtown Manhattan is in trouble

Practical step 1: Magnify stories of people being welcoming

Practical step 2: Hold well-publicized welcome events

When you hear complaints

Introduction

Publish or perish?

What are our disciplines?

Working together?

Where do we work?

Where do we do our research?

What do we study?

The Big Five?

Institutions for collective action?

Too local?

Between the market and the state?

The design principles?

Only case studies?

New commons?

Traditions & trends?

Consequences for our editorial policy?

Future analysis?

Notes

Acknowledgements

Competing Interests

References

Creating places for people

Placemaking and design

More on how I work with -ing lists in planning and design:

The Empty Square